Crusty Logic

New Home for Crusty

2011-01-17T20:49:00.004Z

Crusty Logic has moved:

http://crustylogic.com/

As I mentioned several weeks ago, my son made my Christmas by giving Crusty Logic a much nicer home. Hope you enjoy!

Coming up

2011-01-05T17:49:00.001Z

I hope everyone had an enjoyable New Years and is recovering well from the holidays.

This is an exciting week for me. My son surprised me with a Christmas present of an awesome new website for Crusty Logic. Something I’ve wanted for some time. One feature he included is an about page which is forcing me to actually document what Crusty Logic is all about. A very good and long overdue exercise, but also one that is surprisingly challenging. I hope to have that and a few other things completed and a move to the new site by this Friday!

Next priority is to get results of the TSA survey up. One quickie. There appears to be an interesting and fairly significant difference in the level of concern over TSA issues expressed by respondents from TripAdvisor compared to all other respondents. TripAdvisor respondents, overall and within frequent flyer bands, indicate far less concern about issues of radiation, groping pat-downs, someone seeing them nude, or of TSA potentially violating our Constitution or privacy rights. I wouldn’t have been surprised to see this difference when comparing people who fly a lot versus those who fly very little, but I was rather surprised to find a noticeable difference like this within a band, for instance, those who fly between 20 and 25 roundtrips per year.

See you Friday!

2010-12-20T18:21:00.006Z

Note: Survey results hopefully early next week.

Warning: the following article may be uncomfortable reading for some.

Donna D’ Errico was famous as a ‘Baywatch Babe’ and for posing nude in Playboy. My wife will be glad to know that I haven’t seen her pics from Playboy, though based on articles last week by people who have, she had nothing left to hide. She also recently said that, after going through the latest and greatest of Barack and Janet’s TSA routine, she felt violated.

Some wonder how someone who’s posed for Playboy can feel violated by someone seeing them nude otherwise. This isn’t a lot unlike a prostitute being raped by a client or woman raped by her husband – it’s a matter of consent. D’Errico choosing to pose for playboy when she’s 25 doesn’t mean that she’ll be comfortable or not be violated when she is forced to pose nude when she’s 35 nor does her choice to have done so at one point in one situation in her life mean that she’s willing later or in another situation.

That D’Errico was apparently singled out for a nude-o-scope scan by TSA agents wasn’t surprising. There have been dozens of such reports in the past few weeks. There have also been numerous reports that women, more specifically, young, attractive women, have been ‘randomly’ chosen for the nude-o-scope at a much higher rate than others. This too is not surprising, though I’ve yet to see anything to substantiate it as fact.

Let’s take a look at a few things. Starting with men.

Men in the U.S. spend about $9 billion per year purchasing porn, $24 billion on prostitutes, and $2 billion in strip clubs. That averages to about $520 for every man every year. (This spending gets concentrated in to the middle years with a peak average of about $1,190 at age 42.)

But wait, there’s more. An estimated 95% of men look at porn at least occasionally, and that $9 billion they spend only accounts for about a tenth of it – most of it is free. Over 80% of men will make at least one visit to a prostitute in their life, and 50% will make at least 37 visits. And there are almost no demographic differences in these numbers. They’re the same regardless of wealth, career, religion, or lack thereof.

This all gets to the heart of two critical differences in men and women sexually. For men, the physical and emotional are pretty much completely separate. Physical enjoyment requires no emotional connection, thus why porn and prostitutes do it for men, but not for women. Second, men are extremely visually stimulated and have a huge desire for variety. Every time some guy with a hot wife gets caught with a hooker the women on The View get all worked up - not understanding how Elizabeth Hurley wasn’t good enough for Hugh Grant or Christie Brinkley wasn’t good enough for Peter whatever-his-name-is.

Your Lutheran or Baptist or whatever pastor, rabbi, imam, or priest, more likely than not, looks at porn and visits prostitutes. Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Ted Haggard, and the few thousand other pastors, priests, rabbis’, and imams who’ve been arrested in prostitution stings in the past few years aren’t the only ones - they just got caught (and note that less than one-tenth of one percent of those involved in prostitution are ever arrested).

And it is never really satiated. There is no ‘getting used to it.’ No matter how much porn they view or how many times they visit prostitutes.

This is not to excuse any of this, but simply to help us all understand the average man. I don’t know why God made men this way, but it may well be one of my first questions for him if I get the chance.

Note: If your husband being monogamous is important to you, and he is, consider yourself extremely blessed. He’s a one-in-twenty rarity and achieving something that King David, Solomon, Abraham, Jacob, and most men in the Bible failed to achieve.

Now, put all of that on a shelf for safe keeping and let’s take a brief look at those who would become TSA screeners.

----

The qualification to work as a TSA screener, the folks who grope us, view our nude images, and are apparently responsible for our safety in the air, is a GED or equivalent. The job pays about $14.80 per hour, or about $31,000 per year.

I’m going to go out on a fairly solid limb and say that, on average, people with GED’s who earn $31,000 per year have less self control or self discipline than those who complete university or medical school or who earn higher wages. I know this because lack of self discipline is perhaps the number one reason people do not graduate from high school or university or earn higher wages. It’s most often not lack of intelligence or lack of opportunity or lack of good teachers or lack of anything else – it’s lack of discipline.

ADD moment: Interestingly, the leaders of many drug gangs actually have a fair amount of self discipline – the exact same self discipline that would allow them to be a good leader in a legal enterprise. Dealing drugs is simply a much easier industry to get in to. You can have a lot of self discipline and still lack morals or ethics.

The pay and qualifications for TSA screener and mall cop are very similar. A number of TSA agents actually are former mall cops, and vice-versa. Many TSA screeners and mall cops are also wanna-be real cops, but do not possess the self discipline to get the associates degree or go through the training or pass the tests to become a real cop.

This said, there are exceptions to every average. There are people with GED’s who have become successful CEO’s or great leaders and there are terrific, very disciplined people, teachers a great example, who earn lower than average (or deserved) wages. I know that there are also TSA agents who possess a great deal of self discipline and this is simply the only job available to them at the moment – we’re talking averages here, not ubiquity.

On the flip side, big prop’s to those who do choose to get a GED or work as a TSA agent rather than live off of welfare. Getting a GED and working a job are both credible and good things. But, just because someone gets a GED or works for TSA doesn’t mean that we should turn over our genitals to them or entrust them with nude images of our bodies, anymore than you should me or a politician or a barista.

Now, stick all of that up on the shelf for a bit.

----

Consider for a moment, TSA agents who’ve recently made the news; two busted for possession of child porn and one in Atlanta for rape, just an hour after he left work. Or, one of their bosses at DHS busted for soliciting kids online for sex. (Or the number who’ve been busted for stealing from travelers luggage.)

Unfortunately these issues aren’t unique to TSA agents. Cops, judges, dentists, politicians, priests, and others get busted for child porn, rape, and theft as well.

Cops are, by every measure I’ve found, the most corrupt, supposedly non-criminal, organization in existence. There’s a popular saying “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” The number of cops prosecuted for murder, assault, theft, and other offenses is staggering.

Remember those prostitutes we talked about earlier and the difference in consenting to something or not? Prostitutes have sex with cops more than men of any other career – and not exactly by the sex worker’s willing consent. When a prostitute willingly has sex with someone for $300, that’s free choice, a bad choice perhaps, but still free. When a cop uses his badge to threaten arrest if she doesn’t give him a freebie – that’s not consent, it’s rape. Two recent studies, one by Freakonomics’ author Steven Leavitt, have indicated that a prostitute is more likely to be extorted by a cop for free sex than be arrested by one.

There are two important intertwined issues here. First, people who become cops, on average, posses greater self discipline than people who become TSA screeners. Even so, these cops are, by and large, a group who have an extremely difficult time remaining free of corruption and of restraining themselves to not take advantage of their authority for their own benefit. (And in reality, many of us might find difficulty restraining ourselves in similar situations.)

Second, consider the difference in a cop demanding a freebie from a prostitute in lieu of arrest and a TSA agent selecting Donna D’Errico to be forced to pose for a nude image for his buddy in the back room lest she not be allowed on a plane. Or the difference in that cop demanding a freebie from a prostitute and a cute 14-year-old girl being forced to provide a nude image of herself to a mall cop before proceeding.

When you read our U.S. Constitution something that will, hopefully, stand out to you is how much of it is devoted to restraint of authority. The writers of our Constitution understood the issue of corruption. They understood that extremely few people, if any, can withstand the temptations of authority and power.

Fortunately, we have also seen a number of laws enacted and court decisions made that clarify these constitutional restraints on authority or provide further restraint. Requiring Miranda warnings to those under arrest is one example, clarifying when a cop may search someone, their car, or house, is another.

We are all human. We are all limited in our ability to restrain ourselves. It is critical that we have and enforce laws and cultural norms that severely limit what people in power over us can do. Unfettered authority is far more dangerous to us than terrorists.

Add human frailty to that collection of stuff on the shelf and let’s quickly discuss those backscatter images.

----

“It’s same gender folk viewing my porn-o-scope images, isn’t it?”

The TSA originally said that it would always be same gender and published this widely. Before they even began the actual roll-out of the machines they changed the policy, but didn’t publish that very widely. Realistically, there is about an 80% chance that the person viewing your and everyone’s image is male. The vast majority of TSA employees are male, and in order to provide same-gender gropes, what females they have must be available at the checkpoint, not hidden in a back room.

“And, those images aren’t very realistic, are they? Like, you can’t really see anything, right?”

The TSA has purchased two types of machines; MMW (Millimeter Wave) and Backscatter x-ray. MMW machines use low frequency waves that are very likely less harmful than the radiation of the backscatter x-ray machines and that also produce an image that is less photo-realistic. The images produced by backscatter x-ray are photo-realistic.

The TSA folks ain’t dumb. The only images they have released and thus the only images ever shown, are from the MMW machines. They have refused to release ANY images from the backscatter machines.

Recently a backscatter image of a woman did began circulation. Other than the image being black and white, no imagination was necessary - from toes to labia to nipples to eyes. The image turned out to be a fake. Someone had apparently taken a color image of a completely nude young woman, made it black and white, and made a negative.

What was telling though is that it took the TSA 4 business days to analyze it and determine that it was not from one of their own machines. And this determination was not because the image was photo-realistic, or showed the girl’s genitals clearly and detailed - the reasons you would expect if their machines don’t do so. No, the determination came only after an independent website found the original image and talked about how the fakery had been done in Photoshop.

A judge once said “I know porn when I see it.” This image, that for at least four days the TSA thought could be from their same machines that they use to make images of you and me, would easily qualify as porn for many people in the U.S. It left nothing more to the imagination than Dona D’Ericco’s photo’s in Playboy. Most media refused to run it and instead just described it.

If this image were of an underage girl I don’t think it would be any different than the black and white photo’s by Sally Mann and Jock Sturgis that people protested against as child porn at Barnes and Noble a decade or so ago. The difference being that Mann’s and Sturgis’ subjects were naturists who were OK with their images and willingly, and along with their parents, gave their consent. Our courts were correct in saying that Mann’s and Sturgis’ works were not illegal, however, I think few of us would want our own children to appear nude in them. Or appear nude for some guy in the back room.

----

Now, let’s start putting everything together; male libido, average TSA hire, human frailty in the face of temptations and opportunity, and photo-realistic nude images of cute young boys, girls, and celebrities.

A man who is homosexual or bi-sexual is very unlikely to be able to restrain himself when groping another guy whom he finds attractive. He’s going to get off a bit, pause a bit longer than necessary, explore a bit more, grab with a bit firmer grip. Simple reality. No different than that the average heterosexual male would find it difficult to restrain himself if told to pat-down or grope a cute 16-year-old girl.

Or, take a guy who, if average, will spend about $500 this year on porn, prostitutes, and strip clubs, put him in a job where he and his buddies are paid to select people at random to take a nude photo of, give him unbridled authority to force this on people, and what do you think will happen?

Remember, male libido is an equal opportunity tormentor, it doesn’t discriminate based on career, income, or much of anything else. Self discipline isn’t though. Multiply any issues you think this might raise by these guys perhaps having a bit less self-discipline than average.

Many people who support the new TSA procedures say that doctors see people nude all of the time. Doctors I’ve talked to have also said that this sometimes takes an extreme level of self-discipline. Just consider how many hundreds of doctors have been convicted of inappropriate sexual stuff with their patients. I know of at least one ob-gyn who will not see patients under the age of 30, which does severely limit his income, because he is concerned about his ability to control himself. Now, just think about how much discipline it takes to get a medical degree, the consequences of losing their license for inappropriate sexual contact, and how often these extremely disciplined men still succumb to sexual temptation.

It takes considerably more discipline to become a doctor than to become a chiropractor. Based on a quick review of disciplinary actions, a chiropractor is much more likely to be disciplined for inappropriate sexual actions than a doctor. It takes more discipline to become a chiropractor than to become a TSA screener. What can we expect then of TSA screeners?

Might a TSA screener also think they have a much better chance of avoiding being caught by their victims than a doctor or chiropractor? What is the likelyhood that the former’s victims will suspect something compared to the latter’s who likely experienced some form of physical violation? And might a TSA screener have much less to risk compared to a doctor or chiropractor losing their license?

Is it at all reasonable to assume that these men viewing hundreds of nude images of us at the airport aren’t sexually excited in some way. That some guy isn’t going to find a way to sneak some images home? Maybe use his cell phone camera to make a copy of your naked self for his own enjoyment or to share with a few close friends – on the Internet.

Having women viewing these images would likely be better, but they wouldn’t be immune from temptation either. Just how much would Perez Hilton or TMZ pay for a photo-realistic nude image of Taylor Swift, Abigail Breslin, Chelsea Clinton, or John Kerry’s daughters that he’s so publically proclaimed available? How much would a porn site pay for nude pictures of your un-famous daughter? I can see the web banner now “Girls of the TSA!” or perhaps websites with airport specific pages “Girls of LAX”. I’m sure that the financial payout will be more than enough to overcome any potential punishment.

We couldn’t keep our most sensitive data from Wikileaks, and you think your nude images will remain secure?

One more time; male libido, average TSA hire, human frailty in the face of temptations and opportunity, and photo-realistic nude images of cute young boys, girls, and celebrities.

* A number of people raised similar concerns about women in the military. These concerns were largely shoved aside with responses that ‘military personnel are professionals.’ As of Jun 2010 approximately 37% of women in the military have reported being sexually assaulted or raped (93,000 just between 2002 and Jun 2010). The military’s psychological health organizations estimate that only about 20% of sexual assaults or rapes are ever even reported.

TSA and East Germany and Socialism and Freedom

2010-12-11T15:39:00.006Z

Thursday night I had an interesting conversation with an acquaintance who grew up in West Berlin and now lives in Munich. For over a decade he was head of product direction for Porsche, a car company in Stuttgart. But that wasn’t the most fascinating part of our discussion (though some comments on their all electric strategy were extremely interesting).

What fascinated me was a comment he made about how much crime had risen in West Berlin after the Berlin Wall came down and East Germany was freed from it’s socialist masters.

Remember that after WWII Germany was divided into the democratic and free West Germany and the Socialist and not so free East Germany. Berlin, located in what was now East Germany, was also divided into a democratic and free West Berlin and a Socialist and not so free East Berlin. West Berlin was effectively a democratically free island in the middle of a Socialist country.

People who lived in East Germany, except for those in West Berlin, were not allowed to leave the country without difficult-to-get permission from the government. This was, according to the East German government, for the safety of the people and to prevent the infiltration of fascists who might hinder the will of the German people in establishing the socialist government they desired. It was not until 1989, just 21 years ago, that the wall came down and East Germans were given their liberty.

Stefan said that when they wanted to travel out of their West Berlin island they had three options. The easiest was to fly, but that was expensive in the 60’s and 70’s when he was growing up there. There were two to four train lines, depending on when you counted, but this left you reliant on trains since car rental at that time was difficult. There were also three motorway routes they could take in their car between West Berlin and ‘the rest of the free world’. These routes had been part of ongoing negotiations since the end of WWII and the treaties that divided Germany between, effectively, itself (the three occupation zones of the U.S., U.K, and France - what became independent West Germany and West Berlin) and Russia (Socialist controlled East Germany and East Berlin).

Since these motorways went through East Germany there were a number of restrictions. Before travelling they had to obtain a travel permit from the East German government specifying which route they wanted to use and when they desired to do so. “The Germans would never give you the dates you requested, it was always off by one or two.” Once they left West Berlin they had to drive straight to the border within the time allotted on their permit. They were not allowed to leave the motorway for any reason nor have any contact with any East Germans.

On each end of their East German journey they were subjected to a search by East German authorities. All of their luggage was put on big tables, emptied, and searched, their car was searched, and each person received the official East German personal search (pat-down and feel-up).

“Because of the hassles and because my mother and sisters hated getting patted down, we didn’t leave West Berlin very often.”

Thinking about our recent TSA issues, I asked the gender of the pat-downs and he said that they were always same gender “but that didn’t matter, the ladies said they weren’t whores and didn’t want to be treated like whores.”

On the other hand, they all felt a great freedom once they passed “into the west.” “We’d drive from country to country with only quick passport checks at the borders.” He said that they would often drive around just to experience the freedom of crossing borders so effortlessly (this was before the EU so all European border crossings involved at least passport checks), experiencing all of the different cultures and food, and to buy things that were just too expensive in West Berlin.

He said that his sister who lives in Frankfurt won’t travel to the U.S. now because the new TSA procedures remind her too much of those East German border crossings.

And the rise in crime he’d mentioned?

Because West Berlin was such an island there was just about zero crime. If you committed a crime, there was nowhere to go and hide. You simply couldn’t commit a crime without getting caught. After the West/East divides came down the crime rates soared and for a while were higher than the rest of Europe (though they’re now lower than the European average).

But Stefan said that though crime was up, they were free. And remember, he lived in free West Berlin. No more travel permissions. No more pat-downs at border crossings. For he and his family there was no contest between old and new. They’d take the massively higher crime to have their freedom. There’s no way, he said, that they’d trade those freedoms they’d gained for lower crime or more safety.

When does the scale tip for us? When have we given up so much to the Department of Homeland Security and their TSA that whatever it is they do or do not provide isn’t worth it? At what point does our government impinge on our life, liberty, and happiness more than terrorists or others who might threaten us?

"If you don't like it, don't fly."

2010-12-03T21:41:00.005Z

The affectionate words of DHS chief Janet Napolitano.

OK

Side Note: I plan to post some more in-depth survey analysis on Monday.

A trip must often be at least 2 or 3 hours faster by plane for me to choose air over rail. The new TSA procedures have raised that number dramatically.

I measure that time door to door, not just flight time vs train time. So, while an actual flight might be 2 hours and the train 6 hours, the flight will also involve about an hour more time at the airport pre-departure and perhaps 30 minutes more time after arrival so that’s an extra 1.5 hours that a plane trip will require. Train stations are also usually closer to my destinations than airports which can make another 30 minutes or so difference.

1) The actual difference in time, door to door, is then 4 by air vs 6.5 by rail, so 2.5 hours.

Even so, would I really be willing to give up that extra 2.5 hours?

2) Less wasted time. With plane travel there is a ton of wasted time and interruptions, waiting in lines at check-in, waiting in lines and going through security, more waiting at the gate and waiting to get on-board, no laptop use until about 10-15 minutes after departure, laptops put away 10 – 30 minutes before landing, more time wasted deplaning, getting luggage, etc. And that’s first class. It’s worse for coach. With a train trip I walk straight to my seat, and can immediately get to work on my laptop or relax and read my Kindle, even in 2nd class.

3) Trains are much less of a hassle. I can get to a train station 10 or 15 minutes before departure and comfortably walk directly to my seat on the train. I don’t have to deal with checking in, TSA security hassles, waiting at the gate, boarding processes, fighting for overhead bin space, getting hit by rude passengers carrying too much carry-on stuff, etc.

4) Trains are more relaxing. This is a by-product of the hassle issues above. When I sit down in my seat on a train I’m fairly relaxed and able to be productive or just relax and read. I don’t have to worry about when I can or can’t use my laptop or Kindle, I can get a drink any time I want. By the time I’m in my seat on a plane I’m often a bit wound up and worn out and unless I stopped at Starbucks on my way, I have to wait a bit for anything to eat or drink (and while my airline takes American Express, they don’t make cappuccino’s)

5) More comfortable. ALL seats on a train are larger and more comfortable. It is easier to get to the aisle from a window seat on a train and easier to get up and walk around anytime you desire.

6) Many train seats include a fairly large table area.

7) Air quality on trains is massively better than the recirculated air on planes. Besides being healthier overall, I generally feel much better after an 8 hour train ride than an 8 hour plane ride.

8) Trains are reliable. They don’t suffer nearly as many delays as air travel. Well, at least the trains in Europe don’t. This, by the way, is not something I fault airlines or TSA or anyone for, it’s simply the nature of air travel vs staying on terra firma.

9) A four hour journey on a train isn’t terribly unlike settling down in a café for four hours. The food and drink aren’t usually as good, but the scenery is better and ever changing.

For me anyway, train travel wins big.

I will note that most of my travel is in Europe where train travel is a bit easier than it is in the U.S. Rail along the U.S. East coast is pretty good though, and often a better alternative to air. At least until Barack and Janet decide that if they can’t cop a feel or get a pic of my junk at the airport, that they’ll setup at Penn Station.

Even without their help making me safer on the train, I still have a greater chance of being killed by a terrorist in Times Square, on a U.S. military base, or at an Oregon Christmas Tree lighting, than on a train (and next we’ll talk about how much easier Barack and Janet find focusing on non threatening low hanging fruit than real terrorists).

Dutch Parents vs U.S. Law Enforcement

2010-11-29T18:06:00.006Z

In the U.S. we spend about $60 billion annually on our drug war, about $213 per capita. That’s $213 each year for each and every person. If you’re a family of four, about $1,000 of your money goes to the drug war each year*.

The Netherlands spends a bit over $400 million, or about $24.00 per person. You did read that correctly – we spend about 10 times as much per person as The Netherlands.

In the U.S. we put the burden on Law Enforcement to stop people from using drugs (thus, our much higher cost), The Netherlands puts that burden on parents.

It’d be one thing if The Netherlands achieved the same results as we do. But they don’t. They blow us out of the water. Twice as many teens in the U.S. smoke pot as teens in The Netherlands. And the same goes for other drugs and all age groups.

Which system produces the better results?

As well, there are a number of by-products, or consequences, of these two approaches. One is that while the U.S. system teaches people to avoid law enforcement, the Dutch system relies on and teaches personal responsibility.

Which system likely benefits society the most?

Smoking pot is stupid. Continually spending money on our continually failed wars on prohibition is?

* Now, lest you think that you don’t pay much in taxes so therefore don’t bear much of this burden, think again. Everything you purchase has a higher price because of the taxes that the retailer, manufacturer, and distributors pay and because of the higher wages that they pay to overcome their employees tax burden. Trust me, you pay your $213 every year. And we haven’t even addressed the estimated $32 billion in tax revenue we’re missing.

NOOD's impact & very quick survey results

2010-11-24T18:25:00.010Z

Before we go on, if you haven't already Click here to take survey

All media and the TSA are reporting zero problems at TSA checkpoints today with lines much shorter than normal. NOOD, National Opt-Out Day, must be a failure.

Not. A few key points. By all appearances the number of people flying today seems at an all time pre-Thanksgiving low. Until actual stats come in this is purely anecdotal, but it seems a lot of people have stayed away from air travel because of TSA. I'll also note that Amtrak is busier than ever with many media outlets reporting a lot of traveler stating that they're choosing alternatives to their normal air travel because of TSA.

Second point - TSA are not using the full-body scanners. Reports from across the nation are that the scanners are either not being used at all or only very sporadically. Clearly TSA got a message this past week.

OK, some very quick survey results starting with the race to see what forum generates the most responses.

Tripadvisor: 490
Flyertalk: 28
Thirtythousandfeet: 2
Airlinecrew.net: 2
Crusty Logic: 5*
No Response: 187

* I assume that a major portion of the No Responses are actually Crusty Logic folk since I didn't add this question until 5 days after the survey went up - so I'll give myself a nominal second place :-)

Brief top responses:

91.2% US
2.2% Canada, OZ, Switzerland.
Plus respondents from 18 other countries

53% male
41% female
3% homosexual male

Average:
14 Domestic R/T
3 Int'l R/T
28 trips through TSA per year
22% have been through full-body
73% have opted out

55% of travel is business, 45% is leisure

Impact on future travel:
35% eliminating future air travel until TSA changes
12% reduce air travel by 80%
10% reduce by 60%
23% reduce by 40%

68% of those who've been through new TSA procedures multiple times say that it gets more difficult emotionally with each time, 31% say it stays the same.

A very quick calc of the stats indicates that 73% of respondents fly at least 4 round-trips per year thus at least nominal frequent flyers (I should have included a question on silver/gold/plat status - oh well).

Note: That 35% eliminating future travel seems rather high. Other numbers are not out of reality.

More later

Survey Update

2010-11-24T00:24:00.003Z

I had a couple of requests for custom versions of the TSA survey so people could see what their forum members opinions are. I've added a question to the bottom of page 1 for people to select how they found out about the survey. If you'd like your group/forum added please let me know.

I'll try to get either updates stats posted later tonight or in the morning and hopefully will get the online dynamic stats and charts setup tomorrow.

When TSA Starts Running Obamacare

2010-11-22T17:39:00.005Z

In TSA And What We Can Look Forward To For Healthcare I wrote about an experience I had with a horrible mess caused by TSA in Chicago O'Hare last spring and imagined them running healthcare. Let's think about this again in light of what we've seen recently. Imagine Janet Napolitano and John Pistole (Head of TSA) or other similar government bureaucrats managing your healthcare. Think about what this government agency thinks it can require of you just so you can board a plane. Now think how much further they'd likely go 'for your health'.

Backscatter Full-Body Scanners Dangerous?

2010-11-20T20:06:00.004Z

Dr Manny Alvarez, an ob-gyn, put up an article on foxnews.com today stating that there is no danger in the backscatter x-ray scanners. This is not something he can say even remotely conclusively. The fact is that we DO NOT KNOW what the potential harm from these machines is. Ionizing radiation with Backscatter is very different from standard medical x-rays. There is currently NO public testing information available on these machines, let alone peer reviewed studies. There have been a number of concerns raised by radiologists and others that have not be addressed.

Of further concern is that TSA will not allow either it's own employees or airline passengers to wear a Dosimeter around the machines.

These machines may be just as safe as TSA says they are (if so, why not allow the Dosimeters?). But they may be far more dangerous. We simply do not know at this time so going through one (or working beside one as many TSA employees do) is fairly risky at this point.

Opt-Outs are popular

2010-11-20T16:27:00.005Z

Yesterday it was announced that airline pilots are special and will soon be able to opt-out of humiliating nude-o-scopes or gropings at TSA checkpoints (congrats to them btw). They join members of congress and many other government employees who are special enough to opt-out of this administrations policies. Will flight attendants be next? Oh, and apparently Muslim women may be able to opt-out of the groping - they can grope themselves and then have their hands tested for explosives residue (details of this policy aren't clear).

Obamacare was supposed to be the great equalizer. Everyone on the same plan. Yet McDonald's and a large number of unions have been given permission to opt-out of Obamacare. By some estimates as much as 21% of the U.S. population has been given an opt-out for Obamacare. If it's so great, why are all these opt-outs needed?

TSA Survey

2010-11-18T22:46:00.006Z

OK, finally got the survey up. It's rough, but should do the job. When I get time I'll set up a results page in the survey engine, but until then I'll post aggregate results here.

Click here to take survey

2010.11.20 Results - Sorry it's taken me so long post these. Very briefly, 41% male, 59% female, 88% US citizens, Avg age = 43. Avg 22 trips through TSA per year. Feelings about someone seeing you or spouse nude = very bothered. Seeing daughter nude = between very bothered and terrified. Feelings about grouping; you = very bothered, spouse between very bothered and terrified, daughter = terrified (understandably). Concerns about radiation between No Concern and Very Bothered (somewhat surprising its this low). More on responses for actual TSA experiences later along with updates to the above.

Several people suggested a question on how much of people's travel is leisure vs business and if the new TSA will impact future travel. Great ideas. Both added.

Varying Modesty and TSA's Impact On Teens

2010-11-18T17:24:00.004Z

What may seem fine in the world of John Pistole, Janet Napolitano, and Barack Obama, may not be so fine in the world of you or me.

Modesty is an interesting thing. Generally most males don’t give a rip who sees them nude, women tend to lean a bit more towards the reticent side. But there are people of both genders who run the gamut from absolute terrifying fear to overly outgoing exhibitionists. Are those on the terrifying fear end supposed to stop flying?

How about people who have been raped or sexually assaulted and for whom either of the new options could be prohibitively traumatic? Are these people just not supposed to ever fly again? What did they do to deserve this?

There is also an interesting inter-personal thing with couples. Many men are more protective of their wives and girlfriends bodies than their wives and girlfriends are. For many couples going through Barack and Janet’s Kabuki Theatre, the guy will be far more bothered than his girl over some other guy seeing her nude or someone groping her vagina and boobs in public.

I wonder too about the impact on teen girls. Will a 14-year-old girl who has gone through Janet’s new TSA a number of times on family trips get so de-sensitized to others touching her or seeing her nude, so routinely, that a sexting request for a picture or some guys roaming whatever will seem more normal than perhaps it should? “Fifty guys at the airport have seen me nude, what’s the harm in one more?” Teen guys may be salivating at the gift TSA is giving them*.

Put these last two issues together and what do you get? A boyfriend convincing your daughter that other guys have seen her body, but he hasn't. And he's her boyfriend, so why them and not him? Same for getting to feel her up.

What could possibly be the unintended consequences of these new policies?

* I realize that many teen girls are already pretty quick to send a guy a pic of herself nude or let guys do whatever with her body. Many, and perhaps most, aren't so quick though. This is about the latter.

Will Muslims Be Screened Only By Other Muslims ?

2010-11-18T16:15:00.003Z

CAIR has filed a complaint against TSA that the new procedures violate Islamic teachings. Yesterday rumors started floating around Washington that Barack and Janet were working on a solution. Will the solution be that passengers who opt out of the full body radiation experiment and porn show be allowed to request a pat-down, in private, by someone not just of their own gender, but also of their own religion? Any problems with this?

Full Body Scans Provide NO Additional Safety !!

2010-11-18T14:45:00.003Z

For anyone who has missed it in all of the articles floating around. Full-Body Scans and Enhanced Pat-Downs provide NO additional security or safety. They will detect a few things that the old system didn't but they will not detect some things that the old system did. And BOTH systems miss a myriad of things.

We've got 38 holes in airline security for terrorists to exploit. The old system plugged 5, the new system plugs a different 5, both still leave 33. And for this people want to take the risk of additional radiation and some horny perp getting off on looking at their wife or daughter nude?

It Doesn’t Get Any Better

2010-11-17T22:53:00.004Z

Many things get easier each time we do them. The more I tie my shoes, the easier it gets. Same with a bow tie when I used to wear one. The more I use my camera the easier it gets (though my pictures don’t necessarily improve). Even going through airport security has gotten easier over time. Each new addition by TSA, laptops, shoes, liquids, was a pain the first time, but got better by the second and simply became part of the new normal.

Getting groped or displaying your nude body for a stranger doesn't though. Most of the people I’ve talked to who have made several trips through Barack and Janet's New Kabuki Theatre for Pedophiles have said that it doesn’t get better, and several have said it actually gets worse.

One woman said that the first time was unnerving, the next three or four were tolerable, and she said she thought she was normalizing it. The last two though, have left her feeling traumatized. One guy said that he was part of the no-big-deal crowd and happily went through the NoS without much thought, until the sixth time, when he said he was rather bothered by the thought of it and that being bothered has increased with each successive trip.

Another person said that her 8-year-old daughter was concerned the first time, bothered more the second, and now refuses to go on a trip with her mom next week.

And these are all seasoned travelers.

I’ll put a survey up tomorrow morning to see what others experiences have been.

Barack and Janet’s Kabuki Theatre for Pedophiles

2010-11-17T01:53:00.005Z

A follow-up to last Wednesday's post.

For about a decade now we’ve all been participants in Kabuki Theatre every time we fly a commercial flight in the U.S. Security experts overwhelming agree that most of what the TSA does at their checkpoints has nothing to do with actual security. It just makes the flying public feel better.

Going through TSA has become increasingly irritating. Wait for someone to check my ID, wait at the x-ray belt, grab 3 bins, take out my laptop and put it in one, put my jacket, liquids, and other stuff in a bin, take off my shoes, put my shoes in a bin, wait in socks to go through the metal detector, keep an eye on my stuff so nobody grabs any of it, put everything back together after being cleared through. It’s a pain. It’s irritating. But whatever.

My wife has an artificial hip thanks to a running accident several years ago so she gets to go through a pat-down - every flight. Royal PITA! Some months ago she was in a foot cast so they said they had to take her back to the back for a special x-ray. Thirty-eight minutes and six x-rays later she finally emerged. I can certainly understand their wanting to take every precaution with her, she’s a cute blonde Swede.

Until very recently we put up with it, mostly with good humor. It’s a pain. It’s irritating. It takes a bit more time. Whatever. Putting up with all of it for a bit of theatre wasn’t really a big deal (though I did my fair share of complaining).

What Obama, Janet Napolitano, and TSA are doing now, with Nude-o-Scopes and enhanced groin grope pat-downs, for nothing more than theatre, is a big deal.

Let’s weigh the two sides, increased security vs. invasion of privacy and danger to health, and see what we come up with.

Increased Security ?

The Nude-o-Scope (NoS) will be able to detect some things that the walk-thru metal detectors (WTMD) are not able to. On the other hand, they cannot detect other things. Of nine probable risks, a WTMD can detect five, leaving us vulnerable to four while a NoS can detect, well, five, leaving us vulnerable to four. Two of the five a NoS can detect are at least different than what a WTMD can detect.

For example, the Nude-o-Scope cannot detect many powders such as the PETN used by the Christmas Day Underwear Bomber last year. This coming Christmas one of his friends can go to Detroit airport and have a very good chance of waltzing right through Janet’s latest and greatest security with the exact same powder in the exact same place as Abdulmultallib.

Box-cutters will now be easier to get onboard. A NoS sees through to your skin, but not through it. Wrap your favorite weapon in some leather, apply KY liberally, insert in rectum. Barack and Janet’s Nude-o-Scope won’t see a thing, nor would a pervert groping your (or John Tyner’s) junk. With a bit of will-power I’d bet you could get a gun through easier today than any time in the past few years. Or, like Abdullah Hassan Tali al-Asiri, just stick a bomb up there and make life easier.

And this is just the front door. What about the back door, side door, and windows? There are a number of other ways a determined terrorist can get stuff past security.

Do you feel safer now that the TSA are groping people's genitals, looking at us nude, and performing a radiation experiment on us?

Invasion of Privacy and Danger to Health ?

So what will all of this so improved security cost us?

The Nude-o-Scopes cost about $200k each to purchase and $40k each to install. They require more TSA personnel to operate and will incur an estimated $11k per year in maintenance. Your tax dollars at work. And this is the least of the issues with Barack and Janet’s Kabuki Theatre.

Radiation may be a greater threat than Islamic terrorists. Even TSA's own experts have stated "we could see maybe 10 extra cases of cancer per year." Other experts have put the potential risk much higher. We simply don’t know the risks. They may be as minimal as the TSA states, they may be much greater. Supporters of NoS’s say that the radiation from a NoS is the equivalent of about 2 minutes of solar radiation at flight altitude. One problem with this comparison is that we’re talking about very different wavelengths, which makes a huge difference. Also, if that were true, why is the TSA working to exempt pilots and flight attendants from NoS scans due to radiation concerns? Further, in a hospital you have a very highly educated radiologist and other knowledgeable folks overseeing x-ray machines, who’s doing this for the backscatter machine you go through at the airport?

Our privacy of modesty is gone. What is the guy in the back room seeing when you step into the NoS? (And yes, it is likely to be a guy, as TSA have stated that this will not be gender specific and the vast majority of TSA employees are male.) The TSA has refused to release any image from the new backscatter NoS (the only images they have released are from a millimeter-wave machine which produces a much different image). The only known image, by artist John Wild, is much lower resolution than the machines are advertised to be capable of. Suffice it to say, the guy looking at the image of your wife is seeing a pretty detailed image of her - nude.

Virtual Shave. Doing a Google search on backscatter I ran across a comment on a sex board that said “the best feature [of the body scanners] is that they virtually shave her bush.” Not a clue who this person is, if it’s pure speculation, or he’s a TSA employee who actually knows. But I wouldn’t want my 16-year-old daughter getting a virtual shave, down there, for some minimum wage guy in a back room. Perhaps we’d all feel better if they had Catholic Priests doing the viewing.

What’s Next? Not long after walk-thru metal detectors were deployed in airports we saw them popping up in courthouses, stadiums, high schools, malls, and elsewhere. Will this happen with Nude-o-Scopes? Who will be looking at those images? Given the amount of stuff shoplifted every year I’d be amazed if we don’t see them turning up in the exits from some stores within a couple of years. More radiation? More people seeing us nude?

What do you think? Are the costs of Barack and Janet’s new show worth it for all of the extra security? You know what, if these new measures provided a big increase in security, I’d probably roll with them. But they provide no extra security. Personally I’m not a big fan of incurring a bunch of costs for nothing. Even if there are no better alternatives, why make these changes if they’re not going to do anything?

However, is there a better alternative? Something that very likely would have stopped the shoe bomber, Christmas day bomber, and even 9/11? Who is the one nation that is a bigger target for terrorists than the U.S.?

Israel’s El Al airline has not even had a close call since September of 1970. Not that there haven’t been attempts. They’ve had far more attempts than have U.S. airlines.

More later.

Thankfully, Republicans Lost The Senate!

2010-11-15T17:26:00.003Z

The Teaparty has gotten a lot of gruff from the Republican establishment (and the media) that it’s the Teaparty’s fault that Republicans didn’t get a majority in the Senate. Much of this centering around Teaparty candidates Christine O’Donell and Sharron Angle.

O’Donell quickly proved problematic. Mike Castle, her Republican primary opponent, would very likely have won this seat for the Republicans. Likewise, Sue Lowden, who Sharron Angle defeated in their Republican primary would likely have won that seat for the Republicans. Unlike O’ Donell though, Angle was considered a solid and credible candidate.

But something far, far, far, more important than winning the Senate happened. The Republican establishment was given a message that the people electing them are not happy - with them. They’ve become way too soft and irresponsible when it comes to the size and influence of government.

Did they get the message?

It doesn’t appear so. Yesterday there were a number of events in Washington for the freshman class of lawmakers. Rather than working with the Teaparty to resolve overlap issues, the establishment Republicans appear to have chosen a more antagonistic approach. To be fair, the reaction of the Teaparty Patriots group to this was rather immature and ignorant causing some supporters to understandably distance themselves.

However, what the establishment Republicans are completely missing is that the Teaparty isn’t just some run-amok special interest group (or group of groups). This amorphous group called The Teaparty represents the people, AND, the will of the people. Ignoring this thing, as nebulous as it may be, is stupider than choosing Nancy Pelosi as a leader again.

The Republican establishment needs to get the message. They need to realize that the people who elect them want a very substantially smaller and less intrusive government. They want representatives in office who will deliver. If they don’t get the message this time, they’ll likely get a much stronger version next time that will include a lot of incumbents losing their seats and a huge loss in the house.

Three Mouse Trainers

2010-11-11T17:25:00.001Z

Well, dreams do come true. Sort of.

In the past few days I’ve seen three mouse trainers. People who, after being blocked by a truck in the left lane not moving over when he should, eventually pulled in front of the truck and slowed enough to train the mouse driving it. In all three cases the mouse eventually pulled to the right and the trainer moved on down the road.

The funniest was a guy driving a Smart. If you’re not familiar with them, Smart’s are very small, especially compared to a semi truck. I really wish I could have taken a picture of this huge semi truck on the tail of this tiny little Smart who was training him on road etiquette. I’m pretty sure the mouse driving the truck was well aware of what was going on, when the Smart flashed his headlights at him several times the trucker looked in his rearview mirror. The mouse could easily have moved to the right to let the Smart pass safely by.

Disclaimer: I do not recommend becoming a mouse trainer unless; you know you will not be breaking the law in doing so, and, not creating a danger for yourself or others.

Next Hoop ?

2010-11-10T17:55:00.004Z

While we’re on Islam and Security…

With the latest round of airport security screening changes I can imagine a bunch of Muslims sitting around smoking hooka and falling over laughing at how much control they’ve gained over us. They do something, we jump.

Every time they initiate some terrorist action, failed or successful, our feckless Homeland Security and TSA react, effectively causing all of us to react.

Put explosives in a shoe, now we all have to take our shoes off every time we go through security. Put some stuff in liquids, now we’re limited to no liquids larger than 3 oz and yet one more hassle of taking them out of our bag and putting them in a little clear plastic bag (and no longer can we bring home a bottle of 17 year Auchentoshan in our carry-on).

One stuffed some explosives in his underwear so now our wives and 14-year-old daughters are getting a choice of having a nude image taken for some strange guy in another room to gaze at, or they get an ‘enhanced pat-down’ that includes the TSA employee groping her breasts and genitals (enough to make sure that nothing tiny is hidden anywhere within)*. Sadly, both of these are easily bypassed as the full-body scanner only sees through to the surface of skin so many things hidden inside a body cavity (anus or vagina) can’t be seen nor can something hidden in folds of fat. And, while Superman couldn’t see through lead, full-body scanners apparently can’t see well through some leather (EG, animal skin) so an explosive, gun, or other device could presumably be hidden with some well-done leatherwork. Cows may have just become more sacred to Muslims than Hindus.

Last week they put some explosives in printer cartridges so now printer cartridges are being restricted. And TSA thinks this is the only thing they can hide something in?

Where will restrictions on the freedom we’ve enjoyed for so long end? We’ve already seen airport like screening popping up in government buildings. Will we start to see these same security screenings taking place on subways? Trains? Buses? When rumors swirled that the Mall of America was a target of Muslims their security people began serious discussions about screening for everyone entering it.

“I just want to buy some underwear.”

“I know ma’am, but we need to inspect the underwear you’re wearing to make sure you don’t have a bomb in them.”

And those guys sitting around smoking hooka continue to laugh and dream up the next hoop.

* The image on the original full-body scanners wasn’t very revealing. The image on the newer backscatter machines currently being rolled out are apparently nearly indistinguishable from a black and white photo of someone standing fully nude. Interestingly, while TSA released copies of what the original millimeter-wave images looked like, they have so far refused to do the same for backscatter images. A low-resolution image from an older backscatter machine is here. A better and higher resolution version of this could be your wife or daughter!

Protected By A Veil

2010-11-10T15:15:00.003Z

France, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands, and other countries have recently made news for bans on women wearing Burqas.

CAIR, the Council on American Islamic Relations, has fought against requirements that women not wear Burqas, Veils, and similar head coverings in drivers license, ID card, and passport photos.

Here's one good reason why veils are a bad idea:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1328204/Elizabeth-Smart-kidnapper-refused-let-detective-veil.html

What if… We Could Train Truckers Like We Train Mice?

2010-11-05T16:08:00.001Z

Have you ever been driving down the highway, moved to the left lane to get around a slower car, and suddenly, BAM! It ain’t happening. There’s a truck in the way. And he ain’t budging.

You flash your headlights and… Nothing. No effort to move over so you (and the cars that are now piling up behind you) can get by. You can see a half mile or more of completely clear freeway in front of this guy, but you can’t get to it.

Sunday night I was dreaming about mice… and a trucker who’d blocked me earlier in the day.

If you put a mouse in a maze, he’ll wind his way through until he finds the cheese at the end. The first time he doesn’t even know the cheese is there, but by the second or third time he’s learned a bit, and he works hard to get it as quickly as possible.

He continues to learn with each attempt. He learns which paths are dead-ends that slow him down and begins to avoid them. Interestingly, if, on the last straightaway, just in front of the cheese, you put an electrical shock, he’ll remember it, and find an alternative route. Even though he can see the cheese sitting there, and can’t see the electricity, he remembers the shock, and goes around to the back. Smart little critters.

What if, I dreamed… We legislate that every trucker have an electrode in their seat, with universal remotes for them sold at local Target stores? If a trucker doesn’t move over after you flash your headlights, you press the ‘Mild Reminder’ button, and ‘zzzt’, he gets a slight bit of excitement.

Still hasn’t moved over? You can opt for the ‘Moderate Persuasion’ button. This one was fun because I could see him in his rear-view mirror. He jumped a little. Oh the temptation…

Thus endeth the buttons on the remote. But not my dream. If you’re geeky enough to know what Virtual Easter Eggs are, then you’ll have already googled your third alternative. While holding down the power button on your remote, press the ‘Mild Reminder’ twice, and then press ‘Moderate Persuasion’ once. You’ll likely see the truck swerve right and left a bit, but he’s gotten the message, and he doesn’t want to find out if there’s a fourth option.

This could work even if you’re driving a Smart, Mini-Cooper, or Harley. Talk about power to the little guy!

Alas, even my dreams must eventually lean a bit more Libertarian (as enjoyable as the thought of those very un-Libertarian electrodes was).

What if… Every time a trucker needlessly blocked someone, the blocked driver eventually made their way safely in front of the trucker and slowed his left lane blocking self down a bit? Just enough to cause him to have to downshift four or five gears and then upshift back through those same gears to get back up to speed. Would this be enough of a PITA for him to eventually learn that blocking the left lane can be a bit of a dead-end?

If only this weren’t a dream.

After I woke up I thought about my dreams.

What if…, thought I, we didn’t have to treat truckers like mice?

------

Prologue: Since my dream, that every time I see a truck, I imagine a mouse driving it. Hah!

Almost Legal

2010-11-04T16:35:00.003Z

Election day is always exciting for me, even when my candidates or ballot measures lose. It’s democracy in action like nowhere else on earth. Even though I very strongly disagree with his policy positions, it was still kind of exciting to see Barrack Obama elected in 2008 - we elected our first black president and we saw the power of citizens.

-----

California’s Prop 19, to fully legalize marijuana, didn’t pass. Latest results have it at 46.5% Yes to 53.6% No. Much of the news media are touting this as much more of a defeat than it really is though.

Think back perhaps 10 or 20 years. Would there have even been 20% support for such a measure? My guess is that pot will be decriminalized in California within 4 years. The war on it has simply proven too costly for too little benefit.

For the pro-legalization crowd there may even be a very substantial silver lining in this defeat. If this had passed it would have made California the only place in all of North America where pot could be legally purchased. Similar to what happened in The Netherlands, potheads would have flocked to California to experience smoking pot legally.

It’s one thing for the local populace to smoke it legally, it’s another to have an influx of potheads*.

There will very likely be several additional states joining California with legalization propositions on their ballots in 2012 and 2014. My guess is that California will still be the first, but a handful of others will follow two and four years later.

Just having a proposition like this on the ballot in all of these states will send a message to law enforcement and the judiciary that criminalizing pot is far from universally supported. Having 45% of the citizenry say so in an election sends an even stronger message. This, together with states legalizing medical marijuana, will ease enforcement efforts in these states, and thus, help reduce pot tourism to California.

* Potheads are generally not a problematic bunch. Just compare the crowds in a pot selling coffeeshop in Amsterdam to those in a bar, there or in the U.S. I’ll take the potheads any day.

Amsterdam is, even with their high pot and prostitution tourism, mostly U.S. folk, united in saying that they do not want to again criminalize these vices. They do not want the problems we have with prohibitions. However, as I discussed here, some of the border cities, such as Maastricht, are limiting sales to citizens only.

ObamaCare and Innovation

2010-11-01T21:35:00.003Z

A couple of days ago I got to tour the 3M Innovation Center. The products this company makes are truly amazing, both in the technologies involved and in the sheer number of different products. The average person in the world (yes, the entire world) interacts with 31 different 3M products each day of their lives! Do you have a cell phone with a display? 3M product. You see over 21 roadsigns each day that use 3M reflection technology. EVERY semi truck trailer in the U.S. with those red/white blocks along the bottom is 3M technology. Your car uses 3M adhesives as do most planes in the air. If you have fillings, crowns, or braces in your mouth they are very likely made by 3M. If you watched the Chilean mine rescue you saw a number of 3M products from the face masks to the coatings on the Oakley sunglasses they were wearing.

Yes, this company goes way beyond post-it notes and Scotchguard.

For the computer geeks (others can skip this paragraph) who want to measure their overclocking in multiples instead of percents, there’s a new chip cooler using 3M’s Flourinert liquid*. They can produce this liquid with just about any boiling point so the cooler is much simpler, much less expensive, smaller, and does a better job of cooling than any existing liquid cooling solution. Basically there’s a liquid container bonded to the chip, a small radiator in the top of the case with a cooling fan, and one tube connecting the two. The Flourinert boils, vabor bubbles up the tube to the radiator, cools, and falls back down the same tube as liquid. They were running an Intel Core i7 980 at 13Ghz with this little rig. It was fun to watch how much the bubbles increased as the CPU worked harder and got hotter.

One product they’re hoping to have FDA approval for later this year is a new micro-needle technology. It’s basically a half-inch round transdermal patch with anywhere from 50 to 1,500 extremely tiny needles (try 50μm in diameter for small!). The needle tips are pre-coated during manufacturing with the vaccine or other medicine. When the patch is applied to your skin these microscopic needles go just below the surface to what is known as the stratum corneum**, the meds dissolve, are absorbed by your capillaries, and conveyed throughout your body.

There are a number of benefits over syringes such as reduced chance of infections and other complications, higher efficacy (eg, more likely to get meds to where they need to go), and use of solid meds rather than liquid so they’ll last longer and not require refrigeration. Since micro-needles generally require less than 1/10th as much med, vaccine supplies cover about ten times as many people which will help eliminate problems such as we’ve recently seen with the scarcity of H1N1 vaccines.

This is all in addition to MUCH LESS PAIN for recipients. I hate getting shots. I’m very much looking forward to these things!

One really huge advantage to micro needles is cost savings. With a typical syringe injection only about 1/16th of the meds injected actually make it to your blood where it does any good, micro-needles deliver over 90%. This can reduce a $30 vaccine to $3. Because the solid meds are more stable and don’t require refrigeration there is also less waste (an estimated 15% of injectable meds are thrown out each year). And if they can be easily and safely self-administered there are potential savings in doctors office visits.

Now, let’s get down to brass tacks. 3M invested years and hundreds of millions of dollars developing this technology – for one reason – profits. They know, that if they are successful, privately run medical clinics will beat a path to their door. This product represents a lot of cost savings to the clinics as well as a benefit to attract new customers.

Without the profit potential, companies like 3M will not take the risks and make the investments to develop new technologies like this. Competition among medical clinics, drives competition in medical products, that drives 3M to do what it does.

If the U.S. medical care system were like the NIH in the UK, 3M and other companies would not invest in such risky new technologies. There is simply not enough of a payoff.

So, the next time you get a shot, think about it. They are injecting about 16 times as much med in you as needed. Overall this shot is costing about 10 times as much as it will when micro-needles are available. Under Obamacare there will be many fewer technology advances and products such as micro-needles will likely never be developed.

The more government involvement - the less competition. The less competition – the less innovation. And personally, I really like innovation that takes away real pain – like SHOTS!

* Flourinert has been around for about 40 years. It’s none electrical conducting so you can drop entire circuit boards in it. In fact one of it’s first uses was to help cool a Cray Supercomputer (and these always had clear plexi-glass side panels and bubblers in the bottom, purely for effect – very cool).

** Lightly scratch yourself with your fingernail. You may have reached as deep as the stratum corneum.

Happiness: Union vs. Non-Union

2010-10-27T16:46:00.000+01:00

Are union bus mechanics happier than non-union?

Well, it turns out I’ve got a couple of friends who are bus mechanics to fill me in.

We have 7 bus companies serving our metro area. Two have union mechanics; our public government run transit system, and a private company. Five are private non-union shops.

One friend works for the public transit system. The other worked there for about 15 years but now works for one of the non-union shops. He’s been a bus mechanic for almost 3 decades and knows mechanics at all of the bus companies, thus knows of what he speaks.

Between these two I’ve developed what I think is a fairly accurate, though anecdotal, picture of things. Both are also in agreement on their assessments’. The upshot… Mechanics at the five non-union shops are much happier than those at either of the two union shops.

Mechanics in the union shops spend considerable time focused on, and complaining about, pay, benefits, and work rules. Those in the non-union shops rarely complain about these issues (or apparently any issues).

Mechanics in the union shops have an adversarial relationship with management, non-union mechanics have a friendly, common-good-for-the-company, relationship.

Mechanics in the non-union shops earn slightly lower base pay* (but better benefits) and yet are happier and work harder**.

Both said that working in a non-union shop is much more enjoyable - with happier fellow employees, friendly relationships with management, and a straightforward work environment not grunged up with union rules, meetings, and pressure.

-----

A similar comparison can possibly be made with airline flight attendants. I’ve long thought that Delta’s flight attendants seemed much happier and friendlier than Northwest’s. Guess which is union?

Based on discussions on AirlineCrew.net, Delta’s non-union FA’s make more money (overall and per hour) than their unionized NWA counterparts, but also lack union job protections such as work rules or the hours they can be required to work. It is also much easier to get fired by Delta than NWA though there is no indication that Delta is any more likely to fire FA’s than NWA. These discussions also reveal the happiness quotient - with Delta the clear winner. It’ll be interesting to see the outcome of their current unionization vote.

------

Money never makes us happy, but someone telling us that we should be unhappy certainly seems to work.

* Not including union dues that union mechanics are ‘required’ to pay. The non-union mechanic said that his company is also rolling out a profit sharing plan in 2011 that, based on past performance, will more than make up for any pay differences.

** The working harder (or smarter?) is anecdotal as well as statistical. Anecdotal based simply on their experience and, in the case of one of them, being told by fellow union members to work slower. Statistical in some very quick comparisons on how long certain jobs take with the union shop taking almost 50% longer for several common jobs than the non-union shops. Also, though there is little published data, union busses seem to generally be out of service for maintenance a greater part of every year. This could also be due to other factors such as age or harder use so more analysis would be necessary.

Sanctified Darkness ?

2010-10-18T17:57:00.001+01:00

Interesting discussion at a church recently. They had rented a large front projection screen (22’ x34’) for a production and were given the option of purchasing it fairly cheaply.

The idea of keeping it permanently as a backdrop on their stage/platform and projecting on to it during worship was very appealing. One potential drawback however was that in order for any projections on it to be seen they’d need to very significantly lower the stage lighting level, otherwise the lighting would wash out any projected images.

Turned out there was no drawback to this at all. Just 2 benefits they thought of.

Benefit the first. Having the worship band nearly dark takes everyone’s attention off of the band and puts it on worship – where it belongs. Even the band members said that this has improved their own worship since they feel less like performers on a stage.

Benefit the second. Takes guys minds off the gals. Several years ago in a couple of surveys of Christian men I asked how often they were distracted by attractive women on stage, such as singers, and how often they had mentally undressed them. If I remember correctly 81% said that they had been distracted ‘often’ and 64% said that they had mentally undressed a woman on stage ‘multiple times per month’.

After determining that there were only benefits to the screen and lower lighting level they purchased the screen and have been using it successfully for some time now.

I wish I had surveyed this church prior to this change and could do it again now to see how it looks statistically. Anecdotally though, from a few brief conversations, it’s worked terrifically on both benefits.

American Toughs

2010-10-12T17:53:00.002+01:00

For exercise I ride my bike. The two wheels with pedals variety. My knees won’t let me play football or run anymore so cycling (and skiing in the winter) is my primary exercise. And it’s a very enjoyable one. I ride about 140 miles per week and average 19 – 21 mph*. Not bad for an old guy.

I also wear the funny tight black shorts and pro team jersey that are, for better or worse, a practical necessity. The need for the shorts is rather obvious. There are three reasons for the jersey; a loose jersey flapping in the wind not only becomes an annoyance, but actually irritates my skin after a while, I need the lower back pockets for mid-ride food and sometimes an extra water bottle, and the sharp lines, letters, and bright contrasting colors of the pro-team jerseys are much more prominent to drivers than solid color, striped, or similar jerseys**.

Maybe 3 or 4 times a year someone will yell some snide comment out their window along the lines of “you look like such a dink in that outfit.” Well, duh. Like I don’t already know that. Do they think I have no fashion sense at all?

It’s interesting to me who makes these comments. It’s always some large ‘tough’ guy, usually driving a large pickup or SUV. Most are in their 30’s or 40’s.

I usually just ignore them, but a handful of times I’ve looked at them quizzically and asked “and your point?” which always leaves them sputtering for a bit while they try to figure out what their point is. On two occasions I’ve been invited to pull over so they can “show me their point by beating my face in.” “And that will prove what?” shut one up. The other required me to add “that you can beat up an old skinny guy?”***

We may have learned everything we needed in kindergarten, but apparently some people think they’re still there.

So, what is their point? Why do they feel the need to say something? Do they think that they’re helping me in some way? Does it make them feel better?

A couple of psychologist friends told me that comments like these are rooted in these guys having some kind of inferiority complex. Really? Because I have a nicer bike than they do? My cycling jersey looks better than their Brett Favre jersey? They’re jealous of my new svelte figure? Problems in bed so they’re taking it out on me?

How come women never make comments like this? Or people driving Lexus’s, Porsche’s, or Mercedes?

Not all big ‘tough’ guys driving trucks are this mature. Most people driving pickups are actually quite courteous and always move over a ways when they pass. Many will even wave me through at intersections so that I don’t have to stop (a royal PITA with clip-in pedals).

I have a number of friends who look the part of the guys who have the inferiority complexes. They’re rather big, pot-bellied, maybe a bit Neanderthal looking (and proud of it), and drive pickups. They’re also among the nicest people I know. They’re mostly trades workers who are quick to offer their skill, muscle, and expertise. And these guys have no inferiority complex. Nor any reason to have one. A couple have even taken up cycling. Lycra shorts and all.

BTW, though I’m skinny now, I still drive a big, decade old, V-8, SUV.

* For the exercise types reading this; I'm currently riding a Scott Addict with HED Ardennes wheels and a Garmin 705. I typically ride about 25 – 40 mile loops 3 to 5 days per week and average between 190 and 203 watts with a peak this summer of 880 watts in a sprint. My average heartrate for these is 152 and I usually see a max of around 175 on each ride. My highest heartrate this year was 182.

** Being seen by drivers is extremely high on my survival list and experimentation with a number of jersey’s has indicated that the pro team jersey’s appear much more visible based on the number of cars that pass way too close in different jersey’s. Even within the pro team jersey’s we’ve found that the ‘Saxo Bank Swiss’ and ‘Aqua Sappone’ jersey’s are the best. A psychologist friend told me that the large lettering itself actually probably helps a lot since it triggers thought processes in the drivers brain whereas solid colors, stripes, and other designs do not.

*** I’m not very thrilled with the old part, but I’m quite proud of the skinny part. I used to be more like these guys. It took considerable discipline to change my diet and exercise to lose the weight and keep it off.

Unions are so beneficial.

2010-10-06T18:03:00.001+01:00

I have an interesting friend. His grandfather ran what is today a Fortune 100 company. His father was very successful as well. My friend went to university for business and accounting and was himself fairly successful in his business endeavors. In his late 30’s he tired of the corporate world and went to work for a non-profit that ran a number of organizations including homeless shelters, facilities and programs for underprivileged youth, and a very successful program to help single mothers obtain life and job skills.

He’s always loved engines and working on cars and trucks though. A couple of years ago he decided to take a well deserved break from the non-profit and find a job as a truck mechanic. He enrolled in a local tech school to get his mechanics certificate and began his job search. Now you have to imagine this. A 50-something guy with a masters degree and 3 decades of successful experience in upper management schlepping around trying to find a job as a truck mechanic. One other thing, he owns homes, very nice ones, in Arizona, Florida, Colorado, Wisconsin, Switzerland, and London. He wasn’t looking because he needs the money.

As an entry to becoming a bus mechanic he drove busses for a short bit. A few days ago though, he celebrated one year as a bus mechanic. And he’s happier than ever, especially when he solves some strange problem on one of their hybrid busses.

HOWEVER, that’s all background.

He works in a union shop. Where once he represented his company in union contract negotiations, today he’s himself a union member. This has given him a very interesting perspective.

His first real encounter was when other mechanics would tell him to slow down and not work so fast. That’s not in his repertoire. His boss was soon assigning him three busses per night while others, all senior to him, got one. He couldn’t have been happier.

He and I have both worked as mechanics in non-union shops and he now has experience in two union shops. He said that there’s a clear difference. The non-union folks, though all are working because they need the money, enjoy what they’re doing. They enjoy solving problems or making a car or truck run better. They’re happy that they can have a job doing something that they enjoy. Across the board though the union mechanics have replaced that enjoyment with angst. Their world is ‘us against the company.’

Similarly, the union guys have lost all sense of accomplishment. After 3 years they reach seniority. There’s nothing to attain nor nothing at risk. Their jobs are ‘union protected’ so they would have to try hard to get fired. And, no matter how hard they work, they’ll gain nothing more. Fixing one bus per night or three makes no difference to them so why work three times as hard? They come, they do their mediocre thing, they go home. And never go home with any sense of having accomplished anything.

When I worked as a mechanic I started on ‘straight time’ which meant I was paid an hourly wage, just like the union guys, and did what I was told. The difference is that I could be fired, and didn’t want to be, and I wanted to impress the boss so that I could start working ‘flat rate’ Flat rate is when you’re paid per job. For instance, replacing a water pump on a 1972 Volvo was rated as 45 minutes. Replacing a cylinder head was 3:15 (three hours, fifteen minutes). I think my rate was $20 per hour so I’d get $15 for the water pump and $65 for the cylinder head, regardless of how long it took me.

My first water pump took about 2 hours - not very profitable. After a few months though I was doing most jobs pretty close to time and soon I was coming in a bit under.

Screwing up wasn’t a good option. If I didn’t do a water pump correctly, I had to fix it, for no additional pay. I was far more careful after my first such experience.

Also, while I was paid $20/hour, my employer actually charged my time out at about $40/hour. This covered costs for the building, utilities, and stuff. More importantly, it was where profit came from. The more money I made, the more my employer made. Mechanics not billing enough time (or who screwed up and made customers unhappy) weren’t making money for our employer and didn’t keep their jobs very long.

My pay was a very direct reflection on how well I did my job. I was incented to work well and work hard. Most days I went home with a great sense of accomplishment, either because I’d made a bit extra money from working harder, or had solved some strange problem, or both. Every employee also shared in the profits (and we were very profitable) so every 3 months we’d get a profit sharing bonus. Every one of us made sure to keep our customers happy and coming back.

Back to the union guys. They work for a company that is subsidized by taxpayers – you and I. The fares they charge only cover about 30% of their expenses. Think about my friend who repairs three buses in the time the other 14 mechanics repair one each. Might it cost us taxpayers less to run this bus system if all of the mechanics did three buses per night? The savings wouldn’t be just that they’d need one-third the personnel (and one-third the benefits AND one-third the pension expense), but they’d only need one-third the facilities, utilities, training, insurance, and other costs of running the maintenance operation.

Interestingly this isn’t our only bus system. We have six other bus companies, all privately owned, serving the same area. All six have nicer and cleaner buses than our public bus system. Three charge the same fare and yet run profitable enterprises. The other three charge higher fares but also provide a much higher level of service. Guess what? None of their mechanics (or other employees) are union. Their mechanics also earn more money than the union mechanics and based on anecdotal experience, are much happier.

Hmmm….

BTW, I'm generally a supporter of public transport.

Proud Papa

2010-09-23T16:43:00.001+01:00

It’s been a busy and hectic and amazingly awesome few weeks. My son got married.

I got to realize the dream of every father. To be able to look at my son and feel extremely and hugely proud of the man he’s become.

He’s doing well at university, has been elected head of his university’s broadcast arm, and has a good job offer for after he graduates next spring.

But that’s all just surface (though still very wonderful!)

He persuaded a terrific Christian woman to marry him. Knowing and seeing the love that he has for her makes me proud. That may seem like a strange thing to be proud of, but I am very proud of that in him. His love for her is not a selfish love. It’s a love for who she is and for her love of God. It’s a love that prefers her over himself. It’s the love that Paul talks about when he says that Christ loves us as a husband loves his wife.

Now we’re getting below the surface.

Almost any dolt can find someone to marry them. My new daughter isn’t just someone. That she choose to marry my son (and that her parents agreed) says a lot about him. And it’s the qualities that she sees in him and that I’ve seen develop in him throughout his life that has me bursting.

His Leadership – This is something that extremely few posses, that I don’t think is important for everyone to develop, and that I didn’t necessarily expect in him nor would have been disappointed had he not developed these. Leadership is a rather strange beast. There is often a fine line between leading and serving. A good leader does both and knows when each is needed. He’s learning these (and will continue to throughout his life) along with when direction is critical and when to leave people to do their own thing and contribute in their way. He’s learning what goofs are important to deal with and which to let slide. He’s learning what attributes are most important in people you hire (like character and integrity!).

His Family Leadership – OK, I sort of lied when I said that leadership isn’t important for everyone. Leadership in the home is important for all husbands and fathers. And wives and mothers. Like public leadership, it’s a balancing act of leading and serving, of knowing what’s important to deal with and what’s not. It’s accepting our own failures as the imperfect people we are and knowing what to realistically expect of others. And most important, looking to God to guide us as we guide our families. Seeing him develop in to the husband that God wants him to be is truly joyful.

His Character – A big huge bundle of really important stuff! He has a strong work ethic. He’s compassionate and caring. He has a good sense of humor (and is learning to laugh at his own humanness – like referring to his new wife as his husband in a toast at his reception). He’s developing a good sense of when to be serious and when it’s not so important. He’s learning more and more to appreciate and respect the good in others, to not judge others, but also to choose his friends and close associates carefully. He’s always been fairly even keeled, but he’s gaining a better realization that on the other side of every valley is a hill or mountain (and that hills and mountains don’t last forever) and that eventually there is light at the end of every tunnel and that over time things work out and that a positive attitude goes a long way towards overall happiness.

His Integrity - Truthfulness and honesty and accuracy are important to him. As they should be to all of us. ‘nuff said.

His Faith – Above all else, he is continually deepening his relationship with Christ. Just like all of us he still occasionally has his struggles and doubts, but he’s learning to take these in stride.

So I get to bask for a bit in being a very proud papa. For the man my son has become and for my new daughter - the woman he chose and who agreed to marry him.

Death of Internal Combustion Engines ?

2010-08-30T16:31:00.003+01:00

This morning I heard an interview on the radio with an executive of Ford Motor Co. Interestingly, the bulk of the interview turned in to him defending the internal combustion engine. At least 3 times he said "it's not dead yet, it has a lot of life left in it." Well, it certainly has some, but based on this interview, "a lot" might be a stretch. Nissan won't be able to make Leaf's fast enough to meet demand for at least 3 years. There appears similar clambering for Mercedes' electric Smart, Tesla's S, Mitsubishi's MiEV, and electric vehicles announced from BMW, Porsche, Toyota, and others. Even Chevy is seeing demand for it's Volt.

It'll be interesting to see what percent of new cars sold in 10 years are internal combustion vs electric.

Benevolent Drug Dealer

2010-08-27T17:29:00.003+01:00

This morning I talked with a benevolent drug dealer. Lest you think this is a play on words, it’s not. We’re talking genuine drug dealer here. He sells pot, hash, cocaine, crack, and a small variety of other substances.

Benevolent? You betcha.

His goal is to either get his customers off drugs or at least get them using responsibly.

And he’s having pretty good success. On the latter one anyway. In the past year he said that 12 of his customers have gone from irresponsible, jobless, heavy drug users, to something much better. 3 have stopped drug use altogether and 9 have quit everything but pot which they smoke only moderately (though he said in a couple of cases moderate is in the eyes of the smoker.)

All of them have begun taking more responsibility for their lives. 10 have had jobs, 8 are currently employed, and every one who’s unemployed is looking. 4 of them have started taking responsibility for their children, 3 for the first time since they were born.

He said every single one of them is focused on improving their lives and that of their families.

But why a drug dealer?

“Not more than one or two of these would ever have even talked or listened to anyone from any kind of organization. They talk and listen to me.”

He started by selling his dope for slightly less than other dealers. Today, partly due to pressure from who he gets his stuff from, he sells for about the same as others. He has a steady supply of customers though, probably about 40 regulars. “I’m not worried about losing customers, for every one that I get to cut their use, 2 more come.”

He doesn’t push redemption on anyone. If someone becomes a regular customer he’ll let them know that there are options that he can help them with. From there it’s up to them to ask him for help. Well, sort of.

Similar to how my wife weaned me off of whole milk by suddenly buying only 2%, then 1%, and finally skim, he very slowly weans some of his customers off of heavy use. “It only works for about half though.” He says fairly unemotionally. He’s not underhanded about it, he just tells them that he thinks their use is getting out of control and that he doesn't want to lose them as a customer so how about buying and using just a little less.

“If I wasn’t here they’d all be buying from someone else so I’m not increasing drug use any. And I’ve helped a couple of dozen folks who probably wouldn’t have been helped otherwise.”

Let’s not fool ourselves though. I don’t think many of the folks he’s helped are people most of us would want around our kids. They haven’t become angels and I doubt most of them would even be candidates for Curtis Sliwa’s Guardian Angels. But they’re all doing much better than they were before. They’re less likely to commit any real crimes (as opposed to personal vice), they’re productive instead of welfare expenses, and it sounds like, as imperfect as they are, that some are becoming parents to their children which means that their kids will be less likely to become social problems.

This isn’t a perfect solution and certainly not as successful as our drug war that’s so effective in keeping drugs off our streets in the first place.

Questioning God's Word - Is OK.

2010-08-23T16:58:00.001+01:00

A woman once said to me “there are some things in the Bible that you just shouldn’t question.”

Why? What is she afraid will happen?

Many people take a somewhat passive approach to Bible study. They read it, think about what they’ve read, maybe read a commentary on the passage, hopefully pray about what they’ve read, and that’s about it. This is good. And we should all do this. “But” as Billy Mays often said, “wait, there’s more.”

I take a slightly different tack and one many contemporary Christians often don’t care for. Along with passive study, I’ll often use sort of a ‘devil’s advocate’ approach. I’ll take a position (and one that is often contrary to our Christian pop culture) and see what God’s Word has to say about it. I’ll cover anything from smoking pot or drinking alcohol to pre-marital sex or church attendance.

It’s interesting the fear people have that God’s Word might actually say that whatever their favorite sin is - isn’t really a sin. Why, that would take some of the fun out of judging others.

If ever there was a manuscript that can withstand questioning (and attacks), the Bible is it. And you know what? We just might learn a few things from God in the process.

A Flight Attendant Who Needs To Grow Up !

2010-08-13T18:06:00.000+01:00

This guy who lost his cool and then slid down the emergency chute with a couple of beers in his hands.

People seem to either revile him or worship him. I just think he needs to grow up.

His job is frustrating. He snapped and said some stuff he shouldn’t have to a passenger and then over the intercom. I get it.

It’s his next step where I have a problem. He could have stepped back for a moment, apologized to all the passengers for his rant, and then pleaded for a few weeks or months off before maybe coming back to work. Next best, he could simply have done nothing. Just stopped, gone to the back of the plane or elsewhere, and done nothing.

But stealing a couple of beers, pulling the emergency slide handle, and going for a slide? Really? Time for him to grow up and act like a man instead of a 7-year-old child.

Embarrassment Works !

2010-08-11T17:51:00.006+01:00

A brief follow-up to my previous post…

Peer Pressure is very powerful.

Most of us are, and often rightly so, hesitant to speak up to people violating social etiquette. It’s often simply not worth it and just creates conflict where it’s not really necessary or beneficial.

But sometimes it is worth it.

My guess is that my speaking up to the folks who broke in line and hogged a bunch of tables in Ess-a-Bagel made an impression on them, and others, and that at least a few will be less likely to hog tables in the future, because they now realize how boorish their behavior was, or simply for fear of being called out.

I spend just about every morning, whatever city I’m in, in a café, writing. There are 2 or 3 that have become favorites and that I frequent fairly often. Besides really good cappuccino’s, I like a place where I can have some level of privacy for my laptop screen and where the noise is a sort of a non-distracting murmur.

Occasionally, if someone is talking a lot louder than others and keeps on and on with it, I’ll give them a look that usually gets the message across. If that doesn’t work I might ask them, nicely*, if they can use their inside voices. On several occasions I’ve been thanked by others for saying something to someone who was annoying many. In one café I was recently told that the annoyingly loud talking has noticeably decreased since I’ve been coming in there (and I’ll note that I rarely even say anything anymore). Apparently others have also taken up the ‘inside voice’ banner when I’m not there.

One particularly interesting comment was a gal telling me about a guy I’d said something to almost a year ago. His reaction at the time was to tell me to mind my own business (I responded that I was finding that difficult since he seemed so intent on making his business mine). She said that the next couple of times I came in he quickly quieted down and after a while began talking quieter all the time. Bravo!

My goal, by the way, isn’t to embarrass anyone but simply to communicate that their actions are negatively impacting others around them.

Full Disclosure: The loud talking thing is interesting because I’m far from innocent on this one. I don’t naturally talk very quietly and have had to very intentionally talk quieter so that I don’t annoy others.

What Would Jesus Do?

Well, I’m pretty confident he wouldn’t have acted like I did. Would he have said anything at all? Called down a lightning strike on the dude? I really don’t have a clue what he would have done. Sometime I hope to do a Bible study on Christ’s social etiquette.

One scenario I can imagine is one of his disciples effectively playing my role and then Jesus calmly saying to his disciple (and loud enough for those around to hear), “This man is ignorant of what he is doing, leave him be, he doesn’t know any better.” Likewise I can imagine Jesus totally berating his disciple for actions similar to mine with something like “Ignorant fool. Do you think you are better than this man? Do you never act boorish? Are you perfect in all ways?”

I’m not very good at allowing people to negatively impact me. If someone breaks in line I’m very likely to say something. Likewise if the kid (or adult) behind me on a plane is kicking the back of my seat, or any number of similar things. I don’t believe that being meek means rolling over, but has more to do with self-control and not loosing our cool or being an arrogant jerk. I could have exhibited a bit more meekness in Ess-A-Bagel and still gotten my point across.

Chitlins in Paris

Some time ago I intended to start a blog called Chitlins in Paris for discussion of café culture, food, and travel. Done.

* And nicer today than yesterday. My family has pointed out to me on a few occasions that my rather direct demeanor, while not intended to, can come across as anger.

Café Etiquette: Holding Tables

2010-08-06T18:23:00.003+01:00

Had an interesting experience in New York this past weekend. Went to a place called Ess-A-Bagel, somewhere about 50th and 3rd. Long line of people – not unusual for a New York bagel place. The 4 of us got in line, ordered, got our food, paid, and then went to sit down.

They have about15 small tables (30” round?) and maybe 45 chairs. 3 tables and 6 chairs were being held by a man and his 2 kids – one at each table. His wife and other 2 kids were in the back of the line – about 20 minutes or more from ordering. All other tables were full of people who had their food. I asked, nicely, if we could use one of the tables and 4 of the chairs. Dad said no “We’re holding them.”

We looked around - no other place to sit with our trays of food. Stood for a couple of minutes then asked a second time. He again said no. I looked around and nobody else appeared to be near finished. Only other potential was 1 guy with coffee sitting at a table with 2 empty chairs. I told the dad holding the 3 tables that they shouldn’t hog a bunch of tables when they hadn’t yet gotten their food (I was losing my nice). At this his wife stepped out of line and berated me. I responded that common courtesy is to get your food first and then get a table. A couple of guys in line behind her yelled at me. My son wisely stepped in at this point and told me to just ignore them.

While we stood waiting for another table to finish the cashier cleared some loaves of bread off a table and gave us 2 chairs. I was able to get another chair so 3 sat and 1 stood. BTW, this wouldn’t have bothered me if the place were full of people who were eating – that’s life. It was that I stood while this guy and his two kids sat with no food in 3 chairs and held 3 empty chairs and tables when they didn’t yet need them.

When we were done and headed out the dad and his kids were still sitting there holding the tables and empty chairs, and still without any food. Mom and other 2 kids were still waiting on their food. Interestingly my son noted that the 2 guys behind the mother who’d yelled at me had joined the coffee drinker who, when they came in, had purchased a coffee quickly so he could grab a table and hold it for his 2 buddies. No wonder they were so sensitive over the issue.

-------------

Holding tables is like breaking in line. The line in self-serve cafés goes something like; order, get food, pay, get table. Or sometimes; order, pay, get table, food delivered to table.

Tables have time value. During the time that the dad was holding the tables with his kids waiting on his wife to order and bring their food, 6 to 12 other people could have used those tables*. And while they wait in line other tables will free up for them to use.

On average, if people hold tables like this a café needs 30% to 90% more tables (and thus expensive space) to accommodate the same number of people as they will if nobody holds tables.

Hogging a table before getting your food isn’t fair to those who arrived before you and have already waited in line and gotten their food. Most people understand this and are courteous enough to not hold tables in a busy place. Unfortunately the number of people who lack common regard for others seems to be growing. More and more cafés are having to put in signs about common decency such as “Do NOT get your table until you’ve ordered and paid for your food.”

Ess-A-Bagel should do the same for the few inconsiderate folks who want to hog tables.

Café Etiquette:

If a café is crowded, order and pay for your food BEFORE grabbing a table. This allows others who arrived before you and already have their food to use the table.

Conclusion of the story… As we were leaving my son hung back a bit and apologized for our yelling at them. He said that they were wrong for hogging the tables when they didn’t have food, but that didn’t make it right for us to yell at them. Ah, nothing like learning maturity from your kid (though I’m quite proud to!)  He also noted that the guys kids seemed quite embarrassed by the whole thing.

* Let’s do some math. Assuming 3 people per table, the 15 tables in Ess-A-Bagel can accommodate 45 people for an hour each, 90 people for 30 minutes each, or 135 people for 20 minutes each. If it takes 20 minutes to get your food and 20 minutes to eat, then twice as many people can eat sitting down if nobody holds tables as can if people like this man hold tables while waiting on someone else to order and bring their food.

Rescue Operations: Prostitutes and the Gulf Oil Spill

2010-07-29T17:53:00.010+01:00

Time to get myself in trouble again…

Have you kept up with the gulf oil spill? Seen the pictures of oil coating plants and animals in the marsh areas? Read stories of the various clean-up operations? Held your breath at the latest attempt to stop the leak (which fortunately seems to be working!)?

What would you think if BP and the U.S. Government had said that the leak could not be plugged? That there was no way to stop the flow. That best they could do would be to capture some of the oil, perhaps as much as 90%, but the remainder would continue to leak in to the gulf forever. ‘Instead of trying to capture the oil we’re going to put all of our efforts in to clean-up operations and we believe that in any month or year we’ll be able to clean up as much as 10% of the oil that spills during that period and we’ll be able to help 10% of the birds and other animals impacted.’

Dumb idea?

This is kind of what we’re doing with rescue operations to help enslaved women. All of the focus is on the clean-up and none on stopping it at the source – preventing it from happening in the first place. We save 20 girls, but 400 (4,000?, 40,000?) others are enslaved during the same period*.

The answer, according to many, is that we simply need to end prostitution. Good luck.

In this post Tom Davis talks about ‘Sex divorced from the Love that created it.” This is perhaps a dangerous (and ignorant?) perception. Especially if you want to help girls enslaved into the sex industry. It’s all nice and everything to think about sex and love together, but it’s not reality.

If you ask a woman about sex and love you’ll get a long dissertation on love and romance and maybe a brief mention of sex with the man she loves. If you ask a man you’ll get “I Love Sex.”

For women, sex and love (and emotions) are all intertwined. For men they are pretty much completely separate**. And you know what? This is the way God made us. He made women to desire sex only (or primarily) with the man she loves. He made men to desire, and I mean really really really desire, sex with every cute girl that walks by. And God didn’t stop here, he gave men a nearly unquenchable desire for variety in sex partners.

This is why we have a prostitution industry. Why we’ve had one since the beginning of time. And why we’ll likely have one for at least another year or two.

In his 5 level Hierarchy of Human Needs, Abraham Maslow lists sex twice (and it’s the only thing listed twice btw) ***. He includes Physical Sex as a Physiological need at the base of his pyramid along with air, water, food, and sleep. He lists Sexual Intimacy in the 3rd level of Love and Belonging. In discussions on this, more than a few women ask why it’s included on the 1st level. Men know why. However, as intimacy, both male and female can relate.

Many well-meaning Christian men very vocally disagree with me on all of this. Of those who have done so publically, several have later been caught with their hand in the nookie jar.

I don’t know why God made men and women the way he did. Why he didn’t give men a sex drive similar to women. It would have made life in our society much easier. He didn’t though and there’s not much we can really do about it.

At this point I want to interject something. If your husband’s sexual monogamy is important to you and he is sexually monogamous in your marriage – you are extremely blessed! The title of a popular book by Stephen, Fred, and Mike, ‘Every Man’s Battle’, is quite an understatement for many men.

Reality isn’t very romantic, and we ignore it at our own peril.

Do you believe that we can ever eliminate prostitution? Reduce it? If you answer yes to either of these I’ve got some miracle holy water I’d like to send you (for a small donation of course).

As long as we have men in society we will likely have a huge demand for prostitution. It won’t abate. It won’t go away anytime soon. We can call for an end to prostitution all we want, but to the average horny male, that doesn’t mean a lot. We can spout all the horrifying statistics we can come up with legitimately or illegitimately, but they’ll either get lost in the din of other such horrifying statistics about a host of other issues or, more likely, dismissed as exaggeration and lies.

So what do we do? With this reality how can we more effectively alleviate women being forced to work as prostitutes, effectively raped, in the first place? Instead of saving 20 after they’ve been enslaved and raped, how can we prevent 200 (or 2,000, or 20,000) from being enslaved or raped at all?

--------------

Note: None of the above should be construed as support for men visiting prostitutes - just as pointing out traffic fatalities should not be construed as support for someone intentionally causing a traffic fatality.

* I am not saying that we shouldn’t be helping women caught in bondage. We should certainly continue these efforts.

** Men do enjoy sex (and air, food, and water) more with a woman they love than with a stranger - but they still very much enjoy them, including sex, otherwise. And ‘very much’ is rather an understatement.

*** Maslow was, to the best of my knowledge, not in any way a believer in any Biblical scriptures and was likely a humanist. This is particularly evident with the top level of his pyramid, Self-actualization. However, his model does accurately portray basic human needs and behavior and does so even for Christians.

Christians - Loosing Our Moral Authority (Part I)

2010-07-22T17:40:00.006+01:00

In my previous post about the 40,000 sex slaves I included a link to Tom Davis’s blog (linked under the phrase ‘ignorant Christian’). This has gnawed at me ever since. Davis didn’t just parrot the 40,000 prediction, which would be bad enough given the shakiness of it, he went a step further and made up a story that it had actually happened.

After the 40,000 number was proven so grossly inaccurate after the 2006 world cup, the vast majority of NGO’s, government officials, politicians, and journalists shied away from it this time around. David Batstone a good example. In all of my searching and interviews I’ve found few who would touch it as a prediction for 2010, and not a single one, save Davis, who would say that anything even remotely close actually happened.

I asked Davis about this on his blog. In 3 replies and 1 blog post he chose to try diverting attention from his lying rather than fess up. Has he, in effect, been saying that whatever he says, truth or lie, is worth the reward? That for him, the end justifies the means, in this case lying?

This wasn’t a mis-statement or mis-quote on Davis’ part. It was a blatant and intentional lie. I’ve been a writer for a number of years. You don’t write the words he did by mistake. He knew what he was doing. He knew he was lying.

Confession. I’m very far from perfect on this score. I am a poster child for adult ADD (which I view as more of a blessing than a curse btw). My memory is often a rather strange jumble of things that often takes concerted effort to sort out. Much to the chagrin of many I often think out loud which then leads to either me correcting myself on things or to others doing so. The problem I’ve found with sorting things out before opening my mouth is that by the time I sort them out the conversation has traversed 2 or 3 other topics…

Writing unshackles me. I can, usually, take the time to sort through things and make sure that what I’m saying is both what I actually think and is factually correct.

As Christians we should take the moral high ground. We should be more honest than the rest. God does not need us to lie to accomplish his goals. Truth will win out over lies EVERY TIME.

When we lie we lose our moral authority. And do so collectively. Tom Davis telling a lie doesn’t impact only Tom, but his entire ministry Children's Hopechest* and all of us who are Christians or work in social justice organizations. How can we expect someone to believe us when we’re telling them about Christ when they know they can’t believe us otherwise?

And quite frankly, “I’m not perfect, just forgiven” doesn’t cut it.

Raising liars

This culture of Christian lying seems to start with our teens. We’ve built a little box that defines what a good Christian is. We are quick to condemn anyone who falls outside our little box. Peer pressure and acceptance, for teens, is extremely powerful. What to do when we inevitably then find ourselves outside the little box? Lie about it. It’s a bit tough the first time, but gets easier and easier each successive time.

How often is our little box, defined by our Christian Pop Culture, more restrictive than what God says? How often is someone condemned for something that is a sin in man’s eyes, but not in God’s? If you haven’t already, I suggest reading Phillip Yancey's Soul Survivor for a start on this topic.

This is all then massively exacerbated at many Christian colleges. At Northwestern College, Bethel University, and Bethel Seminary, all in Roseville, MN, lying is part of the daily routine for many. Students are required to attend chapel every day but many find it too easy to check-in quickly (yes, proof of attendance is required) and then sneak out the side door. Most professors require students to sign a statement on tests that they have read ALL of the assigned material. Not doing so will cost you a letter grade. Just a guess, but I’m betting a chunk of students lie about this one.

Many Christian high schools, colleges, and universities require students to sign ‘lifestyle statements’. Most of these don’t just govern on-campus behavior, but ALL behavior, 24-hours per day, until the day they graduate. These almost universally include prohibitions against any form of sex outside of marriage and any alcohol or drug use. Many also include prohibitions against smoking cigarettes, dancing, holding hands, listening to secular music, going to bars, and a host of other prohibitions. I know a lot of students who attend these institutions. Extremely few go more than a week or two without violating the lifestyle statement they signed. And when asked by authorities if they’ve violated it?

One friend told me that for her the greatest thing about moving to her local state university from the Christian college where she’d spent 2 years was the much higher level of integrity and honesty at the non-Christian university. That’s a very sad statement from a committed Christian.

Next comes adulthood. Adult Christians lie to keep their outward appearance inside the little ‘good-Christian’ box. We lie about some of our beliefs and questioning so that we remain ‘Christianly Correct’ to our Christian friends. And we lie, as Tom Davis did, not to protect ourselves from others opinions, but to accomplish our own goals.

And we wonder why Christians are held in such low esteem by so many.

More next week.

* Children's Hopechest appears to be a very worthwhile organization that I have supported in the past. The problem I have now is how much of anything they say can be believed given their leader's willingness to lie so easily.

The Magic of 40,000 Sex Slaves

2010-07-14T17:31:00.009+01:00

In the year or so prior to the 2002 World Cup in Korea and Japan there were sporadic predictions here and there about the numbers of women who would be enslaved and trafficked to meet demand for prostitutes during the games. About a third mentioned the number 40,000.

In the months leading up to the 2006 World Cup in Germany rhetoric heated up and there were thousands of headlines about the predicted 40,000 women who would be trafficked, against their will, in to Germany to work in Germany’s legal brothels. Churches, NGO’s, and other groups spent enormous sums of money to find and help these women. The German government allocated a large number of police, social workers, and others to help out.

Reality? They found 5 (4 women, 1 man). And the extent to which any of them were forced became questionable. The brothels all said that they had plenty of women willing to work and had no need of enslaved women.

Some don’t learn their lessons. Prior to the 2010 World Cup in South Africa a few groups, politicians, and one David Bayever, deputy chairperson of South Africa's Central Drug Authority, toted out the 40,000 number again. Some NGO’s, newspapers, websites, and ignorant Christians* picked up on it. A few NGO’s who work with children began their own twist saying that 40,000 African children would be enslaved into the sex industry to meet demand during the World Cup.

After being burned so bad in 2006 many groups and newspapers wisely shied away from 2010’s hyperbole so the number and placement of headlines was down significantly and many fewer groups spent money to do anything in South Africa.

But why is it always 40,000? Is there research to back this up in any way?

One Group, NotForSaleCampaign.org, founded by David Batstone took a better path with their ‘Red Card’ campaign. For 2010 they wisely steered clear of the 40,000 enslaved women hyperbole and focused on the global slave trade which unfortunately does have way too much basis in reality. They handed out their own version of red cards with quotes such as “The youngest pro footballer signed at 14, which is old if you're a sex slave."

Batstone has spent a number of years working with enslaved women and children around the world. Most of his hyperbole is, unlike that of someone like Melissa Farley, at least based in reality. While in his book ‘Not For Sale’ he ignores the numerous studies that indicate countries with legal prostitution, such as The Netherlands, appear to have significantly lower levels of enslavement or trafficking than countries such as the U.S., at least what he does include is generally factual.

While David and I may disagree about the impact of legalizing or criminalizing prostitution, we do agree on the harm of human slavery and I fully support everything he does.

And the final reality for the 2010 World Cup? Pretty much the same as 2006. Brothels reported more willing sex workers than they needed. Initial reports indicate no known enslavement or trafficking of adults or children.

CNN just reported similar findings in their interviews with brothel owners and prostitutes in South Africa. The prostitutes said that they were looking forward to the end of the world cup so that their regular customers, who’d stayed away from the crowds, would start coming back.

So, what is it about the number 40,000? Has someone somewhere done a study and determined that no matter what and where, the number of enslaved women for prostitution will really be 40,000? Is it some weird axiomatic number? Maybe some study determined that 40,000 was the number to garner the best emotional response in people? Big enough to get people worked up, but not so big as to seem unrealistic – at least without thinking about it? It’ll be interesting to see how often we see 40,000 with the 2014 World Cup.

One final note: Both Japan and Korea, hosts of the 2002 World Cup, have a Tier 1 rating by the U.S. State Department when it comes to human trafficking. This is the best rating any country can get. HOWEVER, my own research would seem to support a much higher rate of human trafficking in both countries than in most Tier 1 countries. I would find it believable that there was a significant increase in human trafficking for the 2002 World Cup. 40,000? Not even close. 1,000 or 2,000? Possibly.

* Amazing how a wild and unsubstantiated prediction one place became "The Facts Remain" that "40,000 HAVE poured in...". And we wonder why Christians are held in such low esteem. As Christians we should be the purveyors of truth not the creators of lies. Note added 15 July: The author of the blog I linked to works with a respected organization. I'm hoping that he will be able to substantiate his claim.

Policy or Politics ?

2010-07-08T17:29:00.003+01:00

Someone today commented that I’d be against any Democrat policy, just because it’s from a Democrat. Another person was surprised to hear that, thinking that I am a Democrat.

The reality is that I’m neither Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, nor anything else. If an Obama or Pelosi policy worked well for our nation I’d be all for it.

If government welfare programs were beneficial I wouldn’t mind paying for them. If they helped people that needed the help and encouraged people to get off of welfare and begin to support themselves I would vote for them. They don’t though. Government welfare, individual or corporate, provides some short-term benefit, but in the long-term just encourages people to make bad decisions and stick their hand out for more. We might benefit one-hundred children this generation but encourage one-thousand to be on welfare next generation.

Likewise, if vice prohibitions worked, I’d be for them. They don’t. They don’t reduce drugs, gambling, or prostitution, and they do cause a plethora of problems.

So far I’m sounding pretty Libertarian. But I disagree with many Libertarians too. While I’m not pro-war, I’m also not nearly as anti-war as the Libertarian plank espouses. And while I believe we should have about 10% as much government as Democrats believe we should and maybe 30% as much as Republicans believe we should, I probably also believe we need twice as much as Libertarians.

In the end I don’t care whose policy something is, as long as it’s a policy that is good for our nation. (What I’ve determined though is that most policies aren’t likely good for our nation, regardless of who they come from. This usually because of unintended consequences, not so much the policy itself.)

I’m amazed how often I hear people trying to defend a policy only because it’s the policy of their chosen party or their favored politician. Even when they agree with all of the reasons it’s a bad policy and that these outweigh anything good about it, they still try to defend it. I’ve even heard people say that they support it just because it’s part of their party’s or favorite politicians plank – no questions asked.

We need to stop being lemmings and start focusing on getting our nation back on track.

(BTW, who are ‘policies’ good for? Mostly government and politicians.)

Environmentally Concious Drug Smugglers !

2010-07-04T04:34:00.003+01:00

In this article on FoxNews we learn that drug smugglers are, if nothing else, Green. My first thought was that if drug smugglers can build an electric boat, certainly our recreational boat companies in the U.S. can. On second thought though, the drug smugglers are probably much better funded. Speaking of electric boats, no recent news from Correct Craft on their experimentation with a Tesla provided drivetrain.

Obama Becoming Irrelevant ?

2010-07-01T17:02:00.004+01:00

Seemingly, President Obama is becoming almost irrelevant. He still holds the office of President of the United States. He still wields a tremendous chunk of power. But he seems to be viewed less and less, even by Democrats and media, as leader of the Democratic party, not to mention leader of our country.

There’s a difference in ‘holding’ the office of POTUS and actually ‘being’ POTUS. Obama never made the transition from politician to POTUS. He still thinks he’s a politician. Rather than President of the United States, he views himself as President of constituent groups (and dictator of others?). He doesn’t see himself as the leader and representative of all of the citizens of the United States and fewer and fewer citizens view him this way.

Even foreign leaders have begun to dismiss him. The President of the United States has, for some time, been viewed by many as the most powerful person in the world and is often called ‘The Leader of the Free World’. At the recent G20 conference Obama was clearly not viewed that way. In fact, European leaders were lecturing him on budget deficits like he was a school child spending too much of his allowance.

In political speak, Obama is losing the conversation. And in a way perhaps unparalleled in the past century.

FoxNews: Fair and Balanced Misinformation?

2010-06-25T17:39:00.005+01:00

This morning on Fox News a reporter in their series on legalizing pot made a statement to Bill Hemmer that “The Netherlands has closed down thousands of pot dispensaries because of crime and illegal activity.”

Really? Thousands closed?

In 1997 there were a total of 1180 in the entire country. In 2004 there were 740. This decline, btw, attributed to a slight decline in demand, a natural consolidation similar to what happens with restaurants, and a push by border cities for shops not to sell to tourists. Today there are an estimated 820, down from 2008’s 852.

Amsterdam police records indicate 1 shop was closed in 2003 because of crime or illegal activity. Yes, the number is one. Not two, not ten, not one-hundred, and not ‘thousands’, but one. Maastricht also closed 1 shop - in 2007.

In 2008 some local councils, including Amsterdam and Rotterdam, passed laws limiting where a coffeeshop (where pot in sold in The Netherlands) can be in proximity to a school. Mostly they said that they had to be greater than 250 meters away. This resulted in approx 85 coffeeshops throughout The Netherlands either closing or moving.

Thousands closed?

The biggest problem with the coffeeshops, according to Dutch police, is with German and Belgian tourists crossing the border and thus some local cities push for their coffeeshops to sell only to Dutch residents. Unlike the average patron elsewhere in The Netherlands, both Dutch citizens and tourists from further away, these cross border tourists tend to be a rowdier and more transient crowd with less respect for the local populace.

More to come…

More... The FoxNews reporter who made these comments was Dan Springer. He also posted similar comments in his blog post on this topic. Thousands closed? Really?

Did anyone notice? Alvin Greene is black.

2010-06-15T17:43:00.005+01:00

Well, back from a well undeserved vacation in Hilton Head, SC.

There was a lot of news and discussion there about Alvin Greene's primary win. After his win the South Carolina Democratic Party asked him to pull out. Interestingly not a single media outlet that I saw criticized the Democrats for this by accusing them of being racist. Not a single one said that the only reason they asked him to pull out was because he's black.

Had Mr. Greene run in and won the Republican primary and then been asked by the Republican Party to pull out, I can assure you that media outlets all over would have criticized the Republicans for being racist.

Mr President: Plug The Damn Hole !

2010-05-27T22:21:00.007+01:00

Yesterday, referring to the oil spill President Obama said “Plug the damn hole!” I agree. And it sounds like they're getting there. The 'top kill' they've been planning for several weeks seems to be working.

Obama seems to get it when it comes to the oil pouring forth from the ocean floor. He gets that the most important priority is to plug the damn hole. Stop the leak. Once that’s done we can move our focus to what to do about all the oil that’s there. If we don’t plug the damn hole first we’ll be overwhelmed.

Obama doesn’t seem to get it when it comes to the illegal immigrants pouring forth from the border. He doesn’t get that the most important priority is to plug the damn hole. Stop the leak. Once that’s done we can move our focus to what to do about all the illegals who are already here. If we don’t plug the damn hole first we’ll be overwhelmed.

It’s only after we plug the damn hole that things differ. The illicit oil we don’t want. We’ll want to get rid of every last bit of it. The illicit immigrants we mostly want. A few bad apples we’ll want to throw in jail or send back from where they came. We need immigrants. Immigrants are important to our country. And we are obviously extremely important to them.

A cops death.

2010-05-13T17:44:00.002+01:00

A cop being killed in the line of duty, just like soldiers in our armed forces, has always given me serious pause. Their death was very likely a result of their doing something to protect me, and all of us, and to make where we live a better and safer place.

The newspaper articles and TV news coverage always talk about what a great cop they were, how many people they helped, how well liked they were, and multitudes of other platitudes.

What I wonder though, and what is ignored by the media, is how corrupt was he. Did he make a little money on the side letting the local drug dealer know when a sting was coming up? Did she over-reach with forfeiture of ‘criminal’ assets and take a few nice things home for herself? Was he a drug dealer himself? Did she sometimes smoke some of the pot confiscated in a drug bust?

Or did he not do any of these things himself but held to the blue code of silence and watched as others did?

An estimated 30% of cops are in the first group and nearly all of the rest are in the blue code of silence group. Only an estimated 1/10 of 1 % aren’t in either group.

When a cop is killed in our state I often see the funeral parade. The coffee café I spend many of my mornings in is not far from our state capital and the parades start in front of here. As I write this there’s a parade of an estimated 800 police cars lining up to honor a cop killed this past weekend.

What group was this cop in? Was he part of the 30%? The 69.9% who kept silent? Or was he part of the 1/10 of 1%, the 1 in 1,000 who didn’t keep silent?

Very likely we’ll never know.

A former prostitute I interviewed told me about a cop she knew. I remember his funeral about 8 or 9 years ago. Like the cop being honored today he was killed in the line of duty and the accolades of what a great cop he was filled all of the local media. There was a story of his saving someone’s life and another of his finding a young child who’d wandered away from home. He had put in considerable time coaching a softball team for underprivileged kids. There were pictures of his wife and kids at his funeral on the front page of the paper. The following May he was inducted into the police memorial in Washington DC.

Her experience with him wasn’t so good though. He and some other cops had setup a sting in a local hotel and busted 4 girls for prostitution. As best she could tell she was number 5, but they made her an offer. If she’d give them each a freebie, they’d let her go. Compared to having an arrest for prostitution on her record and paying a fine that would have required servicing the same number of clients anyway, this was an OK deal from her standpoint.

But that wasn’t the end. Occasionally he or one of the others would stop by her apartment with the same ‘offer’.

She said all of the media attention he got and everyone talking about what a great cop and person and husband and father he was made her ill. “If he’d paid me like any other client I would have liked him, but he didn’t. He raped me.” She said. Several months after his funeral she found out that another girl had a similar relationship with him from a different sting and apparently a different group of other cops.

Interestingly she said that after his death neither one of them ever heard from any of the other cops again.

Universal Sports let me down...

2010-05-10T20:30:00.010+01:00

A couple of weeks ago, on April 22, I posted about the coming world of TV that will unshackle us from the cable TV and Satellite companies. Well, one of my favorite companies in this brave new world, Universal Sports, almost let me down.

I wanted to watch the Giro d’Italia which Universal Sports has the U.S. rights to. Universal had other ideas. Despite Universal Sports best efforts to keep me from giving them revenue, in the end, I won.

The first battle was figuring out that for the first time Universal was indeed charging for what had always been free in years past. Clicking on their 'Live Now!' tab, where we've always previously clicked to watch video, produced... Nothing. They thought this would throw me off and I would think they were simply having technical problems or perhaps weren’t really broadcasting this year. Not me. I pressed on.

I am not at all against Universal Sports charging for this btw. I just wish they’d be a bit more clear about it.

Battle the second, now that I’d determined that they were charging for their programming this year, was figuring out how to pay them revenue. Nothing I could find on any of the cycling pages led me to anywhere that would take my credit card. I did though find a couple of pages that confirmed that they were charging. One offered me Stage 15 for 99 cents. Well, that’s fine, but stage 15 is over 2 weeks away. (Cycling stage races like this or the Tour de France are usually comprised of multiple individual races or ‘stages’, usually 1 per day.) But I persisted and to the persistent often goes the battle. Then it happened. I noticed a tab on their home page for ‘Premium’. And there I found the elusive prize I was looking for. I forced my credit card number on Universal and was rewarded with a receipt for my purchase.

But for Universal, the war wasn’t over. They may have my revenue, but someone there thought that if they could simply thwart my efforts to find what it was I’d thought I’d purchased then I would call and cancel my subscription leaving them the winner.

They tried the ‘buttons that lead nowhere’ trick again, but I’d seen that tactic before and wasn’t fooled. Like the voice menu systems with 132 levels of choices, Universal Sports led me through page after page of anything but the live broadcast I thought I’d purchased. I still persisted. Persistence had paid off once, it would again. Finally I clicked on a button labeled ‘Watch Live’ or something to that effect on a page with a bunch of Giro stuff on it and was pleasantly greeted with video of people racing bikes and pretty decent English commentary!

Universal Sports doesn’t give up easy though. I wasn’t fooled for long. I know the difference in what I was expecting for Sunday’s Stage 2, a mass start road race, and what I was seeing on my screen. They labeled it ‘Live’ but gave me a replay of the previous day’s Stage 1 Time Trial through the streets of Amsterdam. I quickly realized what it was since on Saturday I had watched Stage 1 live online in Dutch, thanks to a Belgian TV broadcaster. Universal Sports won this day’s battle since I had to leave for church before I could find what I thought I’d bought. You don’t fool around with being late to church on Mother’s Day.

The fourth and final battle commenced this morning. Stage 3 was a road race from Amsterdam to Middleburg. I clicked around a bit sure I’d find the secret passage to the actual live broadcast Universal had so reluctantly sold me. I found a screen that listed stages 15, 14, and 4. Was there a code hidden in these seemingly unrelated stages I was given an option of? Was this kind of like the TV show where the guy saw future newspapers every morning? Could I click on these and see future results? Not. Clicking on them led to a description of the race, nothing more. I did though notice that below the big buttons for this 3 stages was some small text that simply said ‘more…’. I clicked, and behold I now had numerous buttons for a number of stages. They were in random order but scanning brought be to one that said ‘Stage 3’. The moment had arrived. I’d be able to watch Stage 3 live with commentary in English instead of Dutch, Italian, or Russian. Not. Nothing. Nada. Universal made a final valiant try by giving me a video player with nothing in it.

I backed up and tried again. I held my breath. The video player came up. I heard what certainly sounded like English commentary suddenly pour forth from my speakers. Then I saw it. Video. Live video of the Giro! Success! I’d won! There it was, the Giro d’Italia bike race, live from The Netherlands. I’d given them revenue and managed to find what they sold me so I could avoid demanding my money back. I’ll savor this victory for the remainder of the 3 week race.

BTW, this broadcast in Dutch is available free and generally runs from about 6am – 11am EDT. http://bvls2.yolasite.com/ch-39.php
Thanks to the-pedal-pusher.com for the images,

Does Caribou Coffee just want to sell paper cups?

2010-05-07T16:34:00.000+01:00

Caribou Coffee recently made a big deal out of ‘major improvements’ to their chain of coffee cafés. They changed their logo and introduced new paper cups with all kinds of slogans on them. Well, I have to say, the reason I go to a café is for the logo and slogans on the cups so I’ll certainly be sure to stop by Caribou.

NOT.

What should they do? They can start by teaching their barista’s how to make a proper cappuccino. A proper cappuccino has froth with a bit of espresso in the froth. A Caribou cappuccino has milk suds with no espresso. Good smooth froth with a bit of espresso is a delight. Your first sips of a Caribou cappuccino are of plain white milk suds. Yuk.

A proper Cappuccino is served in a warmed ceramic mug. Caribou uses paper cups. Paper cups allow the cappuccino to cool too fast, a proper ceramic keeps it warmer longer making for a much more pleasant experience.

The typical Caribou has nothing to absorb sound – namely the two people out of the 18 in the café who are intent on sharing their conversation with everyone else. Sound absorbing materials in the ceiling, on the walls, and perhaps a rug or two on the floor would help immensely.

Many people like to use laptops in cafés. Bright light isn’t good for being able to see laptop screens. Reducing the number of windows (especially in all of the Burger Kings and Carl’s Jr’s that have been converted to Caribou’s) would help. Tinting the windows and putting in blinds could help as well.

Speaking of converted fast-food places. A few walls here and there could help. They’d reduce noise and provide laptop users with darker places with more privacy that are more conducive to working.

Finally, the barista’s. A barista is kind of like a bartender. You don’t want an obnoxious bartender who doesn’t know how to make drinks and you don’t want an obnoxious barista who talks too loud and doesn’t know how to make cappuccino’s.

On the plus side the pseudo fresh baked pastries is an improvement. Healthier and lower calorie options would be better. Fresh natural ingredients, no processed sugars, sized to be maybe 150 calories instead of 500, etc.

Food, Sex, and Self Control

2010-04-29T17:42:00.003+01:00

In a survey I asked a bunch of former drug addicts which they believe more difficult to give up; drugs or sex. Female respondents largely said drugs. Male respondents overwhelmingly said sex.

I wish I’d asked the same question about giving up drugs vs giving up high calorie diets.

Obesity is a major problem in our society and is only getting worse. It is one of the key factors in increased healthcare costs. It is becoming a significant issue for airline flyers who find the rolls of fat of the person next to them flowing over in to their already tight space. The Army recently noted that recruitment efforts are becoming more difficult because many who want to join are too obese to even start training and the numbers who begin training and then are kicked out because they can’t attain a minimum level of fitness is increasing.

A doctor I heard speak once said something to the effect of this: It used to be that we couldn’t avoid physical labor and that calories were difficult to come by. Today we can’t avoid calories but physical labor is difficult to come by.

I understand where he’s coming from, and agree that things have changed, but not to the extent that he espouses. Stop by any major construction site and you’ll see a number of obese people doing physical labor. It’s not just a lack of labor among the general population. Exercise is critical to good health, but almost no amount of exercise can overcome a high calorie diet. A 490 calorie scone from Panera Bread will require about 3 hours of brisk walking (8 miles in 2 hours, 35 minutes) to work off.

Calories are certainly more prevalent today than in the past, but just because they’re available doesn’t mean we have to partake. We can choose to eat healthier. We don’t have to eat Big Mac’s or Alice Springs Chicken (a menu item at Outback Steakhouse that alone has as many calories as many people need in an entire day.)

I’ve done it so I know how difficult it is. Over about a 10 or 15 year period I’d very slowly put on 3 or 4 extra pounds a year until I was noticeably pudgy. I reduced my calorie intake to about 1,800/day to lose the extra 35 lbs and now generally stick to about 2,100 to maintain it. I eat out over 90% of my meals, travel a good bit, and eat at formal dinners and other events. It’s not even remotely impossible to choose to do it and then do so.

This does pose a question. Is every person capable of the self-control and self-discipline necessary to limit their diet to something appropriate like 1,600 – 2,200 calories per day?
How many of the obese people around us are or are not capable of controlling what they eat. Is it different for men and women?

How would you rank sex, drugs, and high calorie food on the self-discipline scale?

Welcome and Thank YOU!

2010-04-27T18:09:00.001+01:00

This blog was originally created for a small group of friends and associates. Looking at the traffic stats it appears there are a number of others who’ve stumbled upon it and even continue to read. So, to all those who suffer through my often hastily and poorly written posts - Thank You! It’s always very gratifying when anyone takes their valuable time to read something I’ve written, whether it be in a national magazine or a simple anonymous blog.

Will posting calories help control obesity?

2010-04-27T18:05:00.001+01:00

The one thing in Obama’s healthcare bill that I have been supportive of is the requirement that restaurants post calorie information on menu’s. Panera Bread cafés began doing this recently of their own initiative. Does it work?

My wife and I ate in Panera for dinner last night. Based on the calories posted I chose a half Cuban chicken sandwich and half cobb salad. 680 calories was within my 900 calorie dinner allowance. So far so good. They also have a promotion for a bakery item for 99 cents. That 490 calorie orange scone (my future daughter-in-law makes real (and very good) scones, Panera’s are not real but more like scone shaped muffins) sure was good.

Based on this study, posting calories is of little benefit 

FitBit

While we’re talking about calories… I read an article recently about a device called a fitbit. It measures your activity throughout the day and tells you how many calories you’ve burned. Sounds like a good thing.

This morning I heard a group of POS (persons of size) talking about something similar that they all have. They were all excited because their devices showed that they burned 250 calories going on a 40 minute walk. “I can eat a candybar.” one said.

There’s a danger in this. Thanks to our metabolism we naturally burn a bunch of calories throughout the day, usually between about 1500 and 2500. I burn about 60 calories per hour when I’m sleeping, about 80/hr for the approximately 12 hours I’m fairly sedentary sitting at my desk, and about 190/hr for the 4 hours I’m somewhat active which includes things like taking a shower, grocery shopping, or cutting the grass. For all of this I can eat about 2200 calories a day and not gain weight. Eating anything more than my base metabolic rate will destroy my svelte figure.

If, for one of my ‘active’ hours, I go for a long walk that burns 250 calories, I haven’t burned an extra 250, but only an extra 60 or so. I’d actually have to walk a 250 calorie per hour pace for a bit over 4 hours to burn off that candybar. I do a lot of bike riding and burn about 1000 calories per hour (approx 20mph pace). That doesn’t mean that I can eat an extra 1000 calories though. Realistically I’ve only burned about an extra 800 calories. In reality though I find that for that 1000 calorie ride I can only eat about 600 calories over my 2200 calorie metabolic rate or similarly 1200 calories on a day I’ve supposedly burned 2000 calories on my bike. I’m not sure if my computer and various charts give high calorie burn information or if it just takes more than a calorie to burn a calorie.

Moral of the story – be careful how many calories you think you’ve burned.

Cable TV: Not Long for this World...

2010-04-22T18:19:00.002+01:00

At the middle of last century AT&T, colloquially known as Ma Bell, controlled all phone service to homes and businesses. If you wanted phone service they were your only choice. You had no options with AT&T. You got what they decided they wanted to offer and that was that. They were regulated by the government but that didn’t seem to be doing much to improve service or lower costs.

Enter Bill McGowan. He decided it was time to undo Ma Bell’s monopoly and give them some competition. They didn’t like the idea. He started a phone company to compete with Ma Bell and then filed a lawsuit to end their monopoly. During this tumultuous time his company, Microwave Communications Inc., later known as MCI, was fondly referred to as a law firm with a microwave dish on it’s roof (it employed more lawyers than telephone people.)

Well, Ma Bell didn’t like competition. They said that they had a legal and regulated monopoly and all was fine, thank you very much. Bill said all wasn’t fine, that they were extremely slow in introducing newer technologies and that their rates were much higher than they needed to be. Ma Bell said that undoing their carefully structured monopoly would put the entire phone system at risk, that there would be tremendous problems and that people wouldn’t be able to make phone calls if Bill won.

Fortunately for all of us, Bill won. MCI began implementing newer technologies and offering services at a fraction of what AT&T had been charging. To their credit, AT&T became a much more efficient, competitive, and technologically advanced company within just a few years instead of the 10 or more many expected.

Today’s cable companies are not much different than AT&T of yesteryear. We are living in an ancient world held down by a paradigm largely developed decades before Al Gore decided he invented the Internet*.

We can only get the channels that our monopoly cable carrier or satellite service decides to offer. I’d like Universal Sports Channel, but my cable company doesn’t offer it so I’m out of luck. And even for channels they do offer we often have to purchase those we don’t want in order to get one we do, just because of the way the cable carriers decide to bundle channels.

My PC isn’t handcuffed like my antiquated cable service. I’m not prevented from viewing tripadvisor.com because Comcast hasn’t negotiated a contract with them. Can you imagine if your internet service provider told you that you could only access the websites they choose to offer?

Likewise we’re limited in options for Al’s internet service. Many people have no alternative for internet but their monopoly cable company. A few have a low-speed DSL option from their local phone company (likely a descendent of Ma Bell), but if they want higher speed, cable is it. Some have no reasonable option at all.

Well, there’s sunshine on the horizon and it won’t even require lawsuits.

Part I of sunshine is that we are beginning to see the unbundling of cable channels from carrier service. Many ‘channels’ are now streaming their programming on their websites. So, while Comcast doesn’t offer Universal Sports, I can just go to Universal Sports website and watch their stream of the Milan – San Remo bike race. I’m no longer locked in to only what Comcast chooses to offer and only at the price Comcast chooses.

In time we’ll see more and more of this and ultimately it will no longer be necessary to subscribe to any ‘channels’ through our cable or satellite company. All we’ll need is internet service and then we’ll ‘tune in’ to whatever ‘channels’ we want to watch via their websites.

One slight cloud though. Just as traditional land-line phone companies are seeing a precipitous decline in customers as more and more of us forego a traditional phone for a cell phone, cable companies will see a decline in people purchasing traditional cable service as we choose to get the channels we want directly via the internet. The cable carriers will want to raise their internet rates to make up for the lost revenue from cable TV subscriptions, but they’ll find a problem. Competition.

Part II of sunshine is 4G. Today you may get the internet at your home through your cable company, DSL from the phone company, or maybe WiFi from your municipality **. Tomorrow you may very well get the internet in your home from your cell phone company. We think of cell service as ‘mobile’, but if it can do mobile cost effectively, it can certainly do stationary even more cost effectively. 4G promises data performance comparable to what cable provides today or greater. DSL has provided little real competition to the cable companies, but 4G and similar wireless technologies will. Just replace your current cable modem with a 4G modem and you’ll be set.

Verizon is leading the charge with a faster rollout (30 cities in Q3 of 2010) and greater speed promises of 5 – 12 Mbps. Sprint is just behind though they say that they will only offer 6 mbps initially. And even our old friend AT&T is there with rollouts (12 mbps rumor) planned for 2011. The 4G spec though includes up to 1 gigabit per second (gbps) for stationary applications.

Today I pay $148/mo for cable and another $62/mo for internet so a total of $208 to Comcast. I pay another $67/mo to my cell company for voice+data. My guess is that the new 4G will come in around $99 for voice+data so for another $32 I can drop my $62/mo cable internet and soon the $148 cable altogether.

The one remaining piece of the puzzle will be for TV’s to include web browsers and media players similar to those we have on our PC’s. LCD and Plasma displays are really just computers built into very large computer displays. Today they have proprietary media players for Netflix and Youtube, tomorrow we’ll see open applications like we have on our PC’s including web browsers and good media players.

* Note: The Internet was actually invented by a guy name Vinton Cerf. I worked for Vint. At MCI.

** 4G data service from cell providers has been a known technology for some time. Despite this, several municipalities around the country have moved forward with installation of WiFi (and low power WiMax) networks, often paid for with tax dollars. It remains to be seen if these will be able to compete with 4G (which includes a higher power version of WiMax). My guess is that these, along with 'wifi hotspots', won't be long for this world either.

Politically Incorrect to help those enslaved ?

2010-04-16T21:19:00.005+01:00

I'm on vacation (and thus this is unedited), but had this article forwarded to me and wanted to make a comparison. Human Trafficking is a serious problem throughout much of the world, in particular Asia and the Middle-East. Stories of people, mostly women, enslaved to work in garment factories, rice fields, brick factories, brothels, and homes are excruciating to read. They are most often not allowed to leave the premise. They are told that if they are disobedient in any way that they will be punished or their family will be. In many countries, such as Thailand, the police and other authorities are of little or no help as they are paid bribes to assist the slave masters and indeed, in some areas this type of slavery is considered socially acceptable.

When International Justice Mission (IJM) is prevented from putting up advertisements with a message to people who might be enslaved that they can contact IJM for help, Americans rightly go ballistic. The Brad Pitt's and Angelina Jolie's of Hollywood, the elected folk in Washington, and others scream about the lack of freedom of speech and how horrible these people are who do not want to help those enslaved.

Yet here in the U.S. this happens and what do we do? If someone plastered bus ads all over telling people that if they were enslaved in a Christian organization and couldn't leave for fear of harm that here was someone who could help, I'd not be offended in the least. So, why are these SIOA bus ads offensive? We know from a number of cases in the U.S. in just the past year that some number Muslims are held hostage, eg, enslaved, under threats of death. Why does Miami-Dade Transit not want to help these people escape?

If I wanted to put up an identical ad, though trying to reach women enslaved and forced to work as prostitutes in Miami, would that be deemed offensive to pimps who enslave these women and thus not allowed on Miami-Dade buses? If it said:

Threat over your head? Leaving Prostitution? RefugeFromProstitution.com

What third world is Miami-Dade becoming?

The Pope needs a Wife !

2010-04-07T18:04:00.004+01:00

What we’ve witnessed from the Catholic church over the past few years with its pedophile priests scandal has been, at the least, very concerning.

What we’ve witnessed from the Vatican in the past week has been absolutely nauseating.

The Pope and others in Catholic leadership need wives.

Not because this will give them a more appropriate outlet for their sexual appetite than the children they’ve been using. Though it will. And not because this will attract more non-pedophiles into the priesthood instead of it being overloaded with those with homosexual pedophilic tendencies. Though it will. But because these men are in dire need of normalcy, balance, and a woman’s opinion in their lives.

There have been dozens of cases (and likely hundreds or thousands) throughout the Catholic church, worldwide, of those in authority protecting priests who rape and molest children rather than taking actions to protect the children from further abuse by Catholic priests. Among other horrific actions, they’ve routinely moved priests accused of molesting and raping children instead of removing them. How many hundreds of men in authority throughout the Catholic church have done this? How many hundreds have made the decision to move one of these rapists and allow them to continue to rape little children? How many thousands have known about these decisions but did nothing?

As this scandal continues to grow it has become obvious that this is pervasive throughout the Catholic church. It is pervasive around the entire globe and it is pervasive at every level including the very top. And it goes back as far as anyone alive today can attest so we can only wonder how long it’s been going on.

Is anyone involved in leadership in any way in the Catholic church, from parish priest to pope, innocent of allowing these children to be molested? As pervasive as these actions appear to be I find it difficult to believe that anyone who has been in leadership for more than a year or two was not aware of what was going on.

We know that there have been thousands of complaints of priests molesting children over the past few decades. How many times, prior to the scandal becoming public, did the Catholic leadership who received these complaints contact any authorities?

What were they thinking when they allowed these things to happen? Were they in sympathy with these men? Were they thinking that they could understand the sexual frustration these men experienced and they could, on some level, sympathize with their molesting and raping children. And because of their sympathizing and empathizing so well with these rapists they deemed their actions justified in moving a molester from one job to another instead of removing him from ministry or doing what any normal person would – turn them over to the police.

How many of the people (I’m finding it difficult to continue calling them men) involved in any way in these decisions empathized because they too had molested children?

What was the Pope thinking when, as cardinal of Germany, he allowed a known child molester to continue working with children? What was the Pope thinking when, as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, he allowed a priest in the U.S., who had been accused many times of molesting children, to continue working with children for several years before taking action?

Can any, even remotely normal person, who finds out that someone who works for them is molesting children continue to allow them to work with children? I find it difficult to imagine what kind of person would do such a thing. Yet the leadership of the Catholic church has done so over and over again.

Can the men running the Catholic church then, in any way, be considered normal?

Yesterday morning a Vatican official commented that he simply can’t imagine the Pope being called to account for his actions. “It’s just not acceptable.” After all, the official said, he is the head of the church. He is ‘Christ’s head’ on earth.

Bullshit! The Pope is no different than any other man. And as we’re seeing, this Pope is far less than most other men.

The leadership of the Catholic church is one of the most insular and dangerous mutual admiration societies in history.

Wives

So, now we get to the topic of wives for these men. If those in authority in the Catholic church had wives and children would they have made different and much better decisions? What man with a child would ever condone the molesting of children as those running the Catholic church have been doing for so long? How often might these people have had a more normal outlook if they had a wife to discuss things with on a routine basis?

Over the past week we’ve seen an outpouring of support for the pope from all levels of Catholic leadership. What we haven’t seen (and what you’d normally expect to see in these circumstances) is a groundswell of those in leadership calling for an investigation of the pope and his actions.

Imagine if there was evidence, even much less than that against the Pope, that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid had known that another Senator had been molesting children and that Reid helped to cover it up to protect the party. I assume that even most Democrats would call for an investigation of Reid. Now imagine if celibacy was a requirement to be a Senator and so the senate was an insular group of celibate men. Might things be different?

Celibacy

I’m not at all against celibacy. I’ve known a handful of men and women who have chosen to live a celibate life. One in particular was a pastor of a church I worked for. I had a great deal of respect for him. There are two key differences; 1) he had chosen celibacy for himself, and 2) he was in leadership with a number of men who were married and had children of their own. He wasn’t in an insular environment of nothing but celibate men.

God never called for celibacy of pastors, elders, priests, or anyone in leadership. Jesus never said that celibacy was good or a requirement in any way. In fact, Peter, appointed by Christ as a church leader, was married. Do the leadership of the Catholic church know better than Christ?

For the first 1,000 years of the Catholic church there was no celibacy requirement. Celibacy was an invention of man for man’s purpose, not God’s.

The disgusting actions of Catholic leaders that have been uncovered in the past few years shows the result of relying on man instead of God and his Word.

Impact of ObamaCare

2010-04-06T18:15:00.000+01:00

A friend of mine runs a local company and made some comments yesterday regarding ObamaCare that I thought interesting.

They are taking an immediate write-off of about $90 million due to the loss of deductibility of retiree health benefits. This comes right off their bottom line and will impact their ability to hire new employees and increase the costs of their products.

They estimate that if they continue with their current level of health benefits that their annual costs will increase by a minimum of 11% or $25 million per year. One really big unknown, and that is not included in the $25 million, is how the elimination of lifetime limits will impact them. Genomics and other massively expensive new procedures and tests could bankrupt them without some form of cap on lifetime expenditures. A cap that under ObamaCare will now be illegal. According to ObamaCare, if you provide health benefits to your employees, it’s all or nothing. A completely open-ended, unlimited expense is impossible for any company.

Within the next year they will need to make a decision about any continued health benefits. Though he didn’t say it, the implied message is that it would be financially irresponsible to continue providing any health benefits after ObamaCare is implemented. Doing so would put the company itself at risk of bankruptcy. Their only choice will be to discontinue all healthcare benefits and have employees obtain healthcare from the government.

Government Healthcare – British Style

He grew up in Britain and provided some insight on the British system that the Democrats want to convert us to. Britain had no real medical system prior to the late 1940’s. Before then extremely few people in Britain, likely less than 5%, EVER saw or talked to a doctor or any other medical person. Without the free enterprise system that the U.S. has Britons tended to wait on the government to do something rather than do it themselves. For Brits the introduction of a government healthcare system in 1948 was a huge improvement over what they didn’t have prior and, without knowing a comparative system, still consider pretty good.

Contrast this with our current healthcare system in the U.S. that is the envy of the entire world. Many Brits come to the U.S. every year for healthcare. I don’t hear of any U.S. folk going to Britain for their better healthcare.

British doctors are paid £60,000 per year (about $100,000) by the NHS (National Health Service). This, they have found, is not enough to encourage people to go through medical school. Due to a shortage of medical students Britain has been importing doctors from India, Morocco, and other countries. The NHS is under serious financial strain and cannot afford to increase pay to doctors so the government are considering other options such as a much shortened medical school regimen that will produce something akin to a jr. doctor who would receive pay of about £50,000 per year.

For most Britons, if they want to see a doctor, they must call their local NHS first thing in the morning and hope to get an appointment that day. If they can’t get one that day then they wait and call again the next morning.

Obama: Anti-Semitic? Stupid? Immature?

2010-04-05T16:31:00.001+01:00

Barack Obama’s actions towards Israel since becoming POTUS have been quite amazing. What I’m not sure about is if they come from his being Anti-Semitic, Immature, or just plain Stupid. It doesn’t take too much research of the Israeli-Palestinian-Muslim conflict to see that Israel is not the aggressor, that Israel’s actions are defensive in nature.

Is Obama really so stupid as to not understand the nature and history of this conflict? I don’t think so. It is impossible for any one person to have a very good understanding of the many conflicts and issues around the world. And that is why our presidents have advisors and the U.S. State Department. Rationality is extremely in Israel’s favor, Obama has numerous intelligent advisors, it’s his job to understand issues before taking any action, he’s not that stupid.

Immature? Maybe. His administration was embarrassed by Israel’s announcement of building more apartments in East Jerusalem during Biden’s visit to Israel. Obama’s administration over-reacted which caused further embarrassment. Perhaps an argument can be made that Obama’s walking out on and cutting short a meeting, and then a planned dinner, with Israel’s head of State was a momentary spat of immaturity. Obama has shown before that he can be very thin-skinned. But he’s also always overcome it and persevered through. At least when he wants to. His recent actions towards Israel were pre-meditated and he’d thought through them. These were not simply spats of immaturity.

Could Obama believe that treating Israel like dirt and sideling up to Islamic states will lead to peace in the Middle-East? Possibly. Peace could also have been achieved prior to WWII by giving Hitler everything he wanted as well. We could have ignored his transgressions and the world he would have created and sought peace at any cost.

Well before Biden’s embarrassing trip we’d seen tips of Obama’s hat. Statements here and there, delaying of signing off on selling planes to Israel, something that until now was routine for any POTUS. Israel has been too good of a friend to the U.S. for too long to attribute Obama’s actions to anything other than Stupidity, Immaturity, or Anti-Semitism. If we’ve ruled out the first two, what’s left?

Waxman: Reality conflicts with what I expected…

2010-03-30T18:39:00.008+01:00

Since ObamaCare was signed in to law a number of companies have begun doing exactly what they said they would be forced to do and what I mentioned, almost 3 weeks ago, they would do (in Theory, Practice, Smoke, and Mirrors). They’re announcing hits on earnings, delaying the hiring of new employees, laying off employees, and reducing benefits.

But, according to Obama’s economists, ObamaCare was supposed to make things better not worse. Why are these companies doing this?

Businesses are getting hit with a number of things, complements of ObamaCare. First up is that providing prescription drug benefits to retirees is no longer tax deductible. This will cost the average Fortune 500 company that chooses to continue this benefit about $112 million per year in extra taxes. This may be chump change to economists playing with numbers in a spreadsheet or Congressfolk spending other people’s money, but it is very real to people running real businesses that need this money to pay employees.

It’s real money that has to come from somewhere. Real businesses can’t simply raise taxes to cover it or change a number in a spreadsheet. They either need to increase the cost of their products (which lowers sales so doesn’t help) or they need to reduce costs which is often best accomplished through reductions in the number of employees or the costs per employee (eg, reduce pay and benefits). Unfortunately other cost savings options either don’t exist or take several years to begin offering any savings.

And Henry Waxman is acting all confused over this. According to Byron York, writing for the Washington Examiner, Waxman sent a letter to CEO’s of several of the companies who have said that ObamaCare will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars and result in reductions in benefits, layoffs, etc. He wants them to come before Congress on April 21st to defend their actions. York wrote:

Waxman's letter suggests he does not accept the company's decision. "The new law is designed to expand coverage and bring down costs, so your assertions are a matter of concern," Waxman wrote to Stephenson, in addition to letters to Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, Caterpillar CEO James Owens, and Deere & Company CEO Samuel Allen. The companies' decisions, Waxman wrote, "appear to conflict with independent analyses."

Well, no surprise here that they conflict. And just who did these ‘independent analyses’? Business people who run real businesses that employ people and contribute to our economy?

Government is good and we need government, but let’s remember that government doesn’t make anything (OK, except I suppose it now makes unprofitable GM cars). It doesn’t contribute to the economy. Every single government employee, every dollar paid out by the government for healthcare, is paid for by people and businesses who do make things. It’s the people who grow our food, build our houses, and make our clothes who contribute to the economy and whose efforts pay for every cent spent by the government.

Does Waxman understand this? Is he or Obamaosi really surprised by the actions these businesses are being forced to take? Interestingly, I don’t think they’re surprised. I fear that what we are seeing was their intention. If businesses can no longer afford to provide healthcare benefits to their employees, where will their employees turn? Why, the government of course. We’re not all socialists now, but just wait a few years.

A solution for the pre-existing conditions problem?

2010-03-23T16:51:00.001Z

When challenged about the unprecedented, and very likely un-Constitutional, federal mandate that every person in the U.S. purchase health insurance, Democrats common retort is that without the mandate we cannot address the problem of insurance companies turning people down for pre-existing conditions. Not.

Their rationale is that without the mandate, but with a requirement that insurance companies not discriminate based on pre-existing conditions, people will just wait to purchase insurance until they have a need for it. If true this would indeed violate the very essence of insurance which is to spread out the risk of unpredictable expenses.

There is perhaps another option. Insurance companies can be required to not discriminate on pre-existing conditions when someone is transferring from one insurer to another. In other words, nobody is required to purchase health insurance. There is no un-Constitutional federal mandate. If you already have insurance though and simply need to transfer from one insurance company to another then the company you are transferring to must accept you, pre-existing medical conditions and all.

If you choose not to purchase insurance then you will be on your own for most medical expenses. But once you are in the insurance pool, and as long as you stay in it, then you’ll have no problems transferring. This eliminates the pre-existing conditions problem, protects the integrity of the insurance companies, and doesn’t violate our Constitution.

The End ?

2010-03-22T16:42:00.002Z

"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic"

- Benjamin Franklin*.

Yesterday we took our biggest step yet towards socialism in the U.S. and also witnessed perhaps the most tyrannical action in 200 years. We haven’t witnessed the end of the republic, but we have witnessed the potential beginning of the end.

Our great country hasn’t come to an apocalyptic end with the passage of Social Security or Medicare nor by the incremental creep of increasing taxpayer funded welfare programs. It won’t from ObamaCare either.

Sadly, if ObamaCare is implemented it will be the middle-class who suffers the most.

Today we ALL share the same great healthcare system. The approximate 87% who have insurance all see the same doctors in the same clinics and hospitals and receive the same high level of care. The waiting room in my doctors office is always representative of a cross-section of our country. Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, young, old, rich and poor. I’ve seen well-known wealthy waiting the same as union laborers waiting the same as people on government assistance. Even the 13% uninsured have access to the exact same hospitals and emergency rooms.

The future will likely include a split healthcare system similar to Canada and the U.K.. A private one for the top 15-20% of wage earners, the wealthy and upper middle class, and a public one for everyone else. The private system will be largely identical to what we all share today. We’ve actually started to see this already. Many doctors and clinics will not see Medicare patients because they can’t afford to provide care for what the government pays. In New York and other heavily regulated states an increasing number of doctors no longer even accept insurance and only see those who can pay out of pocket.

The system for the other 80%? It will still have some great and caring doctors, nurses, and other caregivers. But it will not be able to provide today’s level of care to all comers. It will not be able to afford it nor will enough people choose to work in this lower pay system. Waits for care will increase just as in Canada and the U.K. With scarce resources we’ll begin to see prioritization, likely along the lines of future contributions to society (EG, younger workers will receive priority over those who can’t or don’t work – the older, etc.).

But all is not so gloomy.

The Good

There could be some good from this.

Foremost, we might finally see some practical limits placed on the commerce clause of our U.S. Constitution along with some re-assertion of the state’s rights that our founders intended. More on this later.

Second, we may see an awakening of a populace who have become complacent about our creep towards socialism.

Yesterday was a sad day for our country. But I’m still optimistic.

* Widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin though not absolutely confirmed.

Tiger Arrested for Prostitution

2010-03-18T15:17:00.001Z

Interestingly, that is the one headline about Tiger Woods we haven’t seen in the past several months. Tiger, nor any of the women he paid so well to service him, have been arrested or charged with prostitution.

I’m assuming it’s not an issue of celebrity because Hugh Grant, Charlie Sheen, Sen , and thousands of other famous folk have been arrested for prostitution.

It’s apparently not that only transactions below a certain dollar amount count as prostitution because Tiger appears to have paid less than Elliot Spitzer on at least a couple of occasions.

The form of payment maybe? If payment is of goods and services rather than greenbacks it is no longer considered prostitution? This would seem to make the most sense since it is also the measure applied to the most ubiquitous form of prostitution – guys buying dinners and gifts for girls to get them in bed. If so then I predict a huge increase in purchases of jewelry from Target (of approximately $250 value) along with a corresponding increase in returns of these gifts. “Prostitution officer? I didn’t pay her, I just gave her a gift!”

Such a fuzzy line we’ve created…

Theory, Practice, Smoke, and Mirrors

2010-03-12T11:34:00.001Z

Note: I’m just beginning to look in to this. The following may be way way way off base. More to come when/if I have more time. Stop by if you find anything supporting or contradicting (though I won’t be around this week)…

It’s fascinating to read the opinions and testimony of various economists regarding Obama’s healthcare plan. A long and distinguished list have weighed in on numerous aspects, in particular, the money saving features.

A big chunk of the ‘savings’, as much as 3/4’s, is described thus.

Under the plan companies will, according to economists, do one of 3 things:

1 – Larger companies, those with more than about 250 employees, will hold the value of ‘Cadillac plans’ (the health plans provided to nearly all employees, including union employees in large companies qualify as ‘Cadillac plans’) to just below the level that triggers the proposed excise tax. In other words they will reduce coverage. Initially this tax will be triggered on any amount spent on healthcare and insurance in excess of $10,200*. The difference, approximately $4,200 per employee will be paid in additional salary to the employees.

2 – Many smaller companies will cease providing health insurance, encourage employees to purchase insurance through the government marketplace, and elect to pay the proposed $2,000 fine. The difference between what they are currently spending (approx $7,000) and the $2,000 fine will be paid to employees as additional salary.

3 – Some smaller companies will make no change and will continue with their current health plan.

Nice theory, won’t happen in practice. And I’d think they know it.

Competition, locally and globally, is fierce. Few employees will see any increase in salary as the economists predict. That is simply not reality. This theory though does seem to do a good job of hiding the true costs of Obama’s plan.

Despite theory being wrong, all is perhaps not so bad. One way large employers will reduce the costs of their plans (to keep them under the $10,200 excise tax limit) will be to place employees with risky, and thus more expensive, health behaviors in a separate plan with severely limited coverage. This will include employees who are overweight, smoke, drink heavily or are a drug abuser. If you get a speeding ticket or are otherwise documented as a high health risk you could find yourself in this pool as well. This will allow low risk and healthier employees to have better coverage for the $10,200 companies will be allowed to spend. Theoretically, this will encourage employees to make healthier choices so that they can join the healthy plan that offers better coverage.

* Note that on average these companies spend about $14,400 per employee per year on heathcare and, with few exceptions, every full-time employee from bottom to top receives the same plan (many companies also offer these plans to part-time employees at a pro-rated cost). Glenn Beck and a couple of others have said that government employee healthcare costs are considerably more, perhaps as much as twice. Employee benefits industry reports that I have studied have not supported this.

TSA and what we can look forward to with healthcare

2010-03-08T20:39:00.001Z

Yesterday I flew in to Chicago O’Hare to connect with a flight to Amsterdam. I had an hour and thirty minute connection which shouldn’t have been a problem…

Well, TSA in terminal 5, the international terminal, was a cluster to behold. I was greeted at the security checkpoint by a mass of about 150 and an estimated 50 minute wait. This just for the passport / boarding card check. Even with a flight that had started boarding and a departure in less than an hour I was told, twice, that I had to stand in the line. After 15 minutes in line and listening to a woman walk up and down the line quietly asking for anyone on SAS flight number something or other I asked about my KLM flight. She looked horrified. Apparently I should have been directed to the rush line earlier. She took me there.

Movie Theatre’s have large LCD displays over the ticket taker indicating what movies are currently seating. Why TSA can’t do the same for flights currently boarding and that thus have priority screening, I don’t know.

Once cleared through the passport check I was to choose among 5 lines for x-ray. About 7 people in each line, shouldn’t be a problem. I made my choice and waited some more. All was OK for a few minutes and then my line ground to a halt. I noticed that every time there was suspected contraband the screener checked the bag, stopping our line dead in its tracks until the screener resolved the problem. I really lucked out, there were 5 people in a row whose carry-on’s required hand searching and re-screening. An average of 4 minutes each.

In 18 of the 20 minutes it took our line to process 5 people, the line next to us got 27 people through. All of them, by the way, folks who had come through the passport check behind me.

I now had less than 10 minutes until my flight was scheduled to depart. I mentioned this to one TSA gal and asked if there was anything she could do. “No, we’re getting everyone through as quickly as possible.” I offered that it might be best if, when they encountered a bag with contraband in it, that it be pulled aside, someone other than the screener deal with it, and allow the screener to continue with those in line (most of whom did not have contraband).

“We don’t need your lip.” Was her reply. “We’re getting everyone through as quickly as possible.”

There was nothing I could do. I had no options. I was stuck.

Is this what we can expect with government run healthcare?

We have what is unquestionably the best healthcare system in the world. World leaders and the rich and famous come to the U.S. for the exact same healthcare as our union workers, CEO’s, bus drivers, unemployed, and even bloggers. Why would we want to turn our health over to the government?

Voting against welfare and healthcare is un-Christian

2010-03-05T17:17:00.002Z

“Those voting against healthcare are leaving their Christianity in the closet.”

“It’s the Christian thing to do.” – referring to the need to support increased government welfare programs.

“Anyone who votes against government helping the poor and defenseless cannot call themselves a Christian.”

These and similar quotes are heard often from various supporters of increased government social programs.

But, where in the Bible does it tell anyone to take money from someone else (rich or poor) and give it to others (rich or poor)?

As Christians we are indeed called to help the poor. "There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your brothers and toward the poor and needy in your land." Deuteronomy 15:11

There should be no doubt about this and every Christian should help the poor to the extent that they are able. "If anyone has material possessions and sees his brother in need but has no pity on him, how can the love of God be in him? Dear children, let us not love with words or tongue but with actions and in truth." 1 John 3:17-18

However, we are called to do so as relatives, individuals, or churches. Never as governments. It scares me to make assumptions about scriptures and what the writer or God might have meant. But, every time I hear politicians and others talking about how the government needs to do more for the poor, how the government needs to take more from the wealthy in taxes and give more to the poor, I think of this verse:

"They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely." Mark 12:40

Perhaps more important, God makes it clear that rather than handouts, we are to provide opportunities for the poor and less fortunate to help themselves.

Among many similar verses, Leviticus 19:10 says "Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien. I am the LORD your God."

This is very wise advice.

Someone who is simply given a handout develops no real appreciation for it. They don’t value it. And the more often they receive something for nothing, the less they value what they’ve received. Besides the intrinsic in this is that people who don’t value something can be more wasteful – of food, healthcare choices. Why be a conscientious consumer if it doesn’t cost you anything?

Someone who is given a handout begins to expect more handouts. The more someone receives from others, the more they expect. It’s human nature. Instead of appreciating what they’ve received from others, they begin to complain when they don’t receive it or if they receive less or if what they’re receiving doesn’t increase. Soon that expectation turns into a right – people have filed lawsuits when the handouts stopped or were reduced!

Someone who receives their livelihood with little or none of their own effort develops low self-esteem.

Someone who receives handouts from a far-off faceless government has no appreciation for what they’ve received and for the fact that behind their handout are people who’ve given something up in their own lives to provide the handout.

Those who receive welfare, be it foodstamps, welfare checks, or free healthcare, have little incentive to improve themselves. They have little or no appreciation for what they are receiving, and do not feel that they are a part of the rest of society.

There are shining exceptions, but unfortunately few and far between.

And on the other side is the animosity that these handouts generate. When people who work hard for their money see a significant chunk of it going towards taxes they become irritated. When they see a lot of these taxes then going to help poor people who do not seem appreciative it, who do not seem to be working towards getting off of welfare or helping themselves, who use foodstamps to buy junkfood while listening to their $300 ipod, who have among the highest obesity rates in the population, …this animosity turns to anger. And then when they hear more and more calls for more and more money to be poured in to social welfare programs…

On the other hand, following what the Bible teaches produces a far different result.

Someone who receives support and assistance from an individual or even their church has a much greater appreciation for what they’ve received. They value it more. They know the person or people who they received it from and they know that these people made sacrifices in their own lives to help others. Besides valuing and appreciating what they have received, they have a sense of being loved and cared for by these people.

Someone who works for what they’ve received may have an even greater appreciation. Aside from appreciation and value though, they’ve put their own effort into it. Their self-esteem is improved because they have earned their livelihood themselves. They feel more a part of normal society.

Receiving assistance from those closer to us, relatives, individuals, and our church, also has the benefit of providing a lot more than just material assistance. Closer support often comes with assistance in better managing our lives and support for making better decisions.

And that animosity people feel toward the unappreciative poor? Here it is replaced by enthusiasm. People, even many grinchy kinds of people, enjoy helping those who are genuinely appreciative and who are working and doing their best to help themselves.

The upshot is that instead of people angry on one side that they’re not getting enough handouts and people angry on the other that they’re being taken advantage of, we have appreciation and enthusiasm. We have people working together.

Now, which sounds better?

"Jesus answered, If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.'" Matthew 19:21

Rick Perry Win - Nothing to cheer about.

2010-03-03T17:20:00.002Z

Rick Perry very handily won the Texas Republican Primary yesterday and did so against Kay Bailey Hutchison, who is often believed to be the most popular politician in Texas. Apparently not.

Hutchison is not a fiscal conservative. On that point, I’m glad she was voted down. From what I know of him Perry is at least somewhat fiscally conservative and says the right things about state’s rights and federalism.

On the other hand, his comments about, and treatment of, the FLDS Mormons at Yearning for Zion Ranch is completely and utterly repulsive. To support, in any way, the removal of 500 children from their parents ONLY because you disagree with their polygynous lifestyle is reprehensible. As became evident in the follow-on court cases, there was no evidence whatsoever to justify the government raiding the ranch and taking the children. I strongly disagree with many elements of Mormon theology and some elements of their lifestyle, but unless they are harming others, there is no cause for action against them.

Knowing all of this I get ill every time I see Rick Perry speak.

Boorish Behavior

2010-03-01T16:43:00.001Z

Note: I wrote this earlier and forgot to post…

This morning I was in my favorite café writing the previous post about Harry Reid and rationing healthcare. When I sat at my table I noticed a college-aged girl sitting at a table by herself not too far away from me. About an hour later she was joined by a friend. They talked and laughed, kind of loudly. Maybe 30 minutes later a 3rd friend joined them and their collective loudness increased. It wasn’t just their talking, which was quite louder than it needed to be for all of them to hear, but every few minutes they would erupt into raucous laughing cackles.

Their loud talking was distracting, but I was fairly successful in tuning it out. The cackles were another thing entirely, completely interrupting my train of thought with each outburst.

After some time I finally leaned over and asked if they could “use their inside voices”.

They weren’t amused. One of them was quite offended. But they did quiet down. And I quit bugging them. (that last sentence added just so I could use quite, quiet, and quit in one paragraph ). Two guys sitting on the other side of their table from me mouthed their thanks for my saying something.

About 15 minutes later they announced, somewhat loudly, “Let’s get out of here.”. And off they went. Of course, unlike most patrons of this wonderful café, they didn’t bother to remove their dirty cups so the table would be clean for the next person.

As I was getting ready to leave a woman walked over and thanked me for saying something. I appreciated that.

Where do we draw the line? What behavior is acceptable and what behavior is not. At what point is it proper to correct someone else’s behavior?

If I’m in a drinking pub in Scotland I’d never say anything to someone about being too loud or obnoxious. It’s acceptable and rather expected. There are nuances though. For one, a pub is not a pub is not a pub. Loud and obnoxious isn’t as acceptable in a pub that sells as much food as drink. Loud and obnoxious is more acceptable later than earlier.

In cafés around Europe loud and obnoxious behavior is quite unacceptable and it’s not unusual for staff or others to say something to loud folk (who are often American). Same goes for trains and other public places. In many European countries there’s a pretty strong belief that you should do what you can to avoid interfering with or irritating others. They talk just loud enough for their friends to hear.

In the U.S.?

Bad option or no option at all?

2010-02-25T18:21:00.002Z

Sen. Harry Reid commented this morning that the U.S. is the only nation where people must file for bankruptcy because of healthcare costs. This may or may not be true. What he declined to mention is that in other nations most of these people would not have received the healthcare in the first place.

Healthcare is expensive. There are some areas where we can certainly cut healthcare costs but the reality is that if someone needs major surgery it is going to cost at least thousands and likely tens of thousands and maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars. The costs of the people involved, the equipment, drugs, and hospital facilities are what they are.

No nation can afford to provide full, complete, and unrationed healthcare to all of its citizens. The costs to do so, with today’s technology, would exceed the GDP of any nation.

Some form of rationing is required. There will not be enough to go around. Most countries with socialized medicine use Queuing as their primary method of rationing. You simply wait your turn until whatever you need becomes available. Many surgical procedures, such as a hip replacement, that we consider critical in the U.S. and that are often provided within hours, may involve several month waits in Canada, The UK, and other countries.

Limiting what procedures are available comes next. Many newer or more expensive procedures fairly widely available in the U.S. are not available at all in countries with socialized medicine. Worse, the vast majority of these are developed in the U.S., if we adopt government run healthcare system who will invent even better options?

The final form of rationing is probably best termed Justification. Does this person’s life justify spending limited resources on them? Is it worth spending $20k on a hip replacement to a 90-year-old? How about $40k in chemo therapy for someone with severe mental and physical disabilities?

So yes Harry, some people in the U.S. may go in to debt or even bankruptcy to get medical care . But under the system you want to give us they wouldn’t even have that option.

Gays @ CPAC: Separation of Church and Politics

2010-02-23T17:18:00.002Z

Among the numerous commotions at last week’s CPAC in Washington was the official inclusion and recognition of Gay Republicans.

For some people this is a screaming huge oxymoron. How can someone who is gay, and more to the point, someone who supports being gay, be any part of the conservative (or Republican) establishment?

My question: Why can’t they be?

If I understand the purpose of CPAC it is to fight for political issues, not religious issues. If I’m correct, and I admit, I may not be, then our primary goals are:

National Security – We want (and need) our government to coordinate our national defenses. To help us protect ourselves from those countries, ideologies, and individuals who might want to harm us and take away our liberties.

Domestic Security – We need government to coordinate the laws and law enforcement necessary for peaceful and orderly daily life. We need laws and law enforcement to protect us from criminals who would do us harm such as murderers, rapists, thieves, and drunk drivers and we need laws for coordinating common and fair behavior such as rules of the road and financial accounting.

Functional Infrastructure – We need government to help coordinate the building and maintaining of roadways, flight control, telecommunications, and similar infrastructure for the public good.

Restraint – We want a more fiscally responsible, smaller, and less intrusive government. We don’t want government meddling in or taking over private enterprise or private lives. We don’t want socialist redistribution. We don’t want heavy regulations telling us what we can and cannot do if it doesn’t impact other people.

So far, I’d guess many gays fit in extremely well. I know a number of gays who support all of the above 100%.

So where’s the problem?

At the core is that, for many Christians, myself included, homosexuality is a sin. Well, if we kick out everyone in the conservative movement who sins, or even just the ones who sin regularly, we’ll have a pretty small group. The bigger issue though is that this isn’t a church. Do the Baptists want to kick out everyone who’s not Baptist? The Catholics kick out all the non-Catholics? What about the Episcopalians, Atheists, Presbyterians, Agnostics, and Jews? What religious groups ideology and theology do we plan to use as a litmus test for who to include and who not to?

This is a political group, not a church. Its purpose is to promote and organize a government that makes the U.S. a safe and equitable place for each and all of us to pursue life, liberty, and happiness. Someone being gay does not intrude on my life, liberty or happiness.

How about gay marriage? Well, I’m not for it. In fact, in light of recent events with Catholic Charities being forced out of their adoption business, I’m pretty strongly opposed to it. But then, a number of gays I know aren’t for it either. Gay marriage also isn’t one of the core fundamentals above. And if we’re planning to use support of gay marriage as a litmus test then we have a lot of non-gays to deal with first, starting with our newest Republican, Sen. Scott Brown. We can welcome someone who supports the core concepts of liberty and fiscal responsibility and agree to disagree on gay marriage while we continue to discuss it, its implications, and options, in a rational way.

Gays in the military? No problem (though I don’t support Don’t Ask Don’t Tell as it effectively commands someone to lie, not a good precedent). The valid concern is one of housing and this can be solved similarly to how it was with women.

The gay agenda? First we have to define what ‘the gay agenda’ is, and that would take much longer than the time we have here. There are elements of it that I strongly oppose. Interestingly, I know gays who oppose these elements as well.

What about the estimated 17% of Republicans who visited prostitutes during the GOP convention in Minneapolis? Do we give them all the boot? Many politically active conservative Christians believe that drinking alcohol is a sin, are they working to kick everyone out of the conservative movement who drinks? We can welcome those who drink alcohol and at the same time support tougher drunk driving penalties. We can welcome gays and at the same time support separate housing for gays in the military.

Tiger - Just Average

2010-02-19T14:06:00.000Z

Tiger Woods gave a brief 15 minute statement this morning. The first we’ve seen or heard from him since the public revelations of his sex life late last year. The amount of coverage devoted to Tiger and his sexual trysts over the past couple of months has been truly amazing. Perhaps more interesting is the amount of time over the past 48 hours given over to speculation on what he would say this morning. He even surpassed the profit motives of wall-street as trading came to a near standstill for the 15 minutes he spoke. And on the disgusting side is the coverage and stalking of his wife, children, and friends the past months.

And all of this because he’s, well, just like everyone else.

He’s like Elliot Spitzer, Hugh Grant, Ryan Philippe, Charlie Sheen, Jude Law, Peter Cook, Ethan Hawke, David Boreanaz, Jessie Ventura, Ted Haggard, Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Bakker, Kobe Bryant, David Vitter, Dick Morris, Larry Craig, Barney Frank, Henry Hyde, Bob Livingston, Geraldo Rivera, Newt Gingrich, Bill Randall, Bob Barr, Wayne Pace, Newt Gingrich, John Edwards, Gary Hart, Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John F. Kennedy, David Letterman,

…and over 80% of all men.

OK, maybe he’s not totally like David Boreanaz who was married to Rachel Uchitel when he had a mistress (or three?) unlike Tiger for whom Rachel was a mistress. Got it?

Statistically, over 80% of the male journalists, pundits, and others talking about Tiger are no different than he is. And over 80% of the men watching the news coverage or reading the plethora of articles about him are just like him. And over 80% of the women have husbands just like him. Just about every study on this topic indicates that fewer than 20% of married men are monogamous (and then only if you don’t include porn).

And Tiger being average is news? This would be like news bulletins that Tiger believes Elvis is dead. Actually, there are probably more guys who believe that Elvis is alive than are monogamous so Tiger believing Elvis is dead would be more newsworthy.

Who are we to be critical of Tiger? Why is his sex life even remotely any of our business anyway?

I’m not saying that what Tiger did is OK or that it’s OK for anyone. But our collective national hypocrisy (to quote Joseph McNamara) is rather deafening.

We need to get over ourselves.

What Do Women Pray For ?

2010-02-18T23:23:00.003Z

29 Hours in a Day
Male Menopause
A Truly Universal Remote
Free Chocolate
Male Periods
Clone to wash, cook, clean bathrooms, please him...
Three-Day Weekends
Bounce Free Workouts
Male Pregnancy
Urinals (just like the boys have)
Did I mention guys getting a visit from Aunt Flo? Every month!

Simple Public Decorum

2010-02-16T16:57:00.001Z

Are people less considerate of others than they used to be? Are people in the U.S. less considerate of others than people in Europe? Or Asia?

Yesterday I was working in one of my favorite cafes. There is a line of about 10 small rectangular tables lined up along one wall that are prime spots for people with laptops. The table next to me was empty and a woman who’s a professor at a local university put her bag on it and began to get her laptop out when she noticed a friend sitting nearby. She stopped to talk to him briefly and as their conversation continued she sat in the chair to rest her legs (she walks with a cane, not sure why).

About 10 minutes later a guy who was sitting in one of the sofa’s came over, grabbed her bag and then shouted at me “Is this yours?”

“No.” I replied as I reached to keep her laptop from falling out of her bag.

The professor shouted over that it was hers and her friend came over and grabbed her bag from the ofe who was still holding it.

I said no more until about 30 minutes later as I was putting my laptop away to leave. I mentioned to the guy that he really shouldn’t grab other people’s stuff without asking. He was quite offended by my saying this.

In Defense of Pot Heads ?

2010-02-15T18:46:00.001Z

Before delving in to this let me make one thing clear. SMOKING POT IS STUPID! It is not harmless. It messes with peoples mental ability.

But then, we all do stupid things occasionally don’t we?

I recently met a guy named Marcus. Marcus is African American, 37-years-old, dropped out of school in 11th grade, has 4 kids (that he knows of), and lives with the mother of the two youngest along with his second child. He doesn’t know where his first child, Sarah is. Sarah’s mother moved away with her soon after she was born. Marcus has a couple of arrests on his record for drug possession, once for cocaine, once for pot. Thanks to prison over-crowding he was given probation both times instead of a jail sentence. He no longer does cocaine, but still gets together with friends once or twice a week to smoke a joint in the garage behind his house.

I drove by his house one day. This is not a neighborhood I felt very comfortable in and I’ve spent some time in some pretty unappealing and rough neighborhoods. I didn’t even slow down when I drove by. His house is a 1940’s 500 square foot pseudo Cap Cod in need of a lot of work. I also saw the 1 car parallelogram shaped garage in back where he and his friends smoke their pot.

So, what do you think about Marcus? Sound like a problem? Not someone you’d want living next door to you? Someone with a lot of things in his life to fix? Should he be arrested and convicted for dealing and smoking pot? Think his children should be taken away from him?

I met Marcus through a mutual acquaintance, one of the people Marcus smokes a joint with occasionally. Our mutual acquaintance just so happens to also be his
former probation officer. Marcus has been off probation for 14 years but they’ve stayed in touch because his probation officer has become a mentor to Marcus for these many years. It was his probation officer who, a year after his probation ended, helped him decide to quite doing cocaine, to marry the mother of his child, and to become a father rather than just a baby maker.

Marcus works at an industrial laundry. He doesn’t make much money but it’s a job and has provided 7 years of steady income. He knows the street and the local gangs and works to keep his kids free from them. Though he cut his own education short he’s intent on all of his children at least finishing high school. He doesn’t know much about college or ‘professional’ careers but he does know that he wants them to get jobs and be “decent”.

What good would it do to arrest Marcus? To throw him in prison? He may not be an ideal father, but he is a father. Will his kids do better if they’re visiting him in prison instead of having him at home?

And what about a pot smoking probation officer? I met him at a Christmas dinner for the board of directors for our state’s second largest charitable foundation. My wife is on the board with his wife (who is BTW, a VP of Engineering for a Fortune 100 corporation). Their oldest child goes to NYU and plans to be a neurologist. Should he be arrested for his pot smoking? What good would that do?

Both of these guys will tell you that they know that they’ve been permanently harmed by their pot smoking. I don’t disagree, particularly with Marcus, who exhibits typical pot-head slowness. My probation officer friend said that he has cut back to just once or twice a month though. Neither of them believes that any future harm from their occasional use is worth giving it up.

On this last point I strongly disagree. I think that their current and future use, even just once or twice per month, will harm them. I also think that their actions are harming their families.

On the other hand, they are both, from everything I’ve been able to tell, decent husbands and pretty good fathers.

Is it possible that a pot head can also be a good spouse, father, and citizen? Probable even?

Our society’s solution is to arrest Marcus. Is that the right thing to do?

Christians divorce more than heathens ?

2010-02-11T19:57:00.006Z

There is a well-known study by Barna Group regarding a higher divorce rate among Christians than among non-Christians. I've also mentioned my own initial study indicating that the divorce rate among those who meet at Christian colleges appears even higher than this.

The February 2010 issue of Christianity Today magazine includes an article entitled Why Gayle Haggard Stayed. The clear insinuation that it would be expected by Christianity Today's readers that she would have left her husband Ted Haggard.

Throughout the Biblical period and likely up through the first 1800 or so years of Christianity no such headline would ever have appeared. Until just very recently, perhaps the past 80 or so years, a woman in Gayle's position wouldn't have even considered divorcing her husband. Why? First because doing so would go against God's commands regarding marriage and divorce, second would be her love for her children and the knowledge of the impact of divorce on them, and perhaps a distant third would be her concern for how she would support herself and her children as a single-mother.

Some reading this will quickly disagree with my first point. Certainly it would be OK and maybe even preferable for Gayle to divorce Ted in this situation. Biblically though, that's not so. The only reason given for divorce in the Bible is adultery, which throughout history and until just very recently involved a married woman having sex with someone other than her husband. Ted having sex with someone other than his wife was not adultery and from a Biblical standpoint was not grounds for divorce.

I'm not excusing Ted Haggard's actions. From my reading of the Bible, he was clearly involved in sexual sin. But when we wonder why we get divorced so much more now than ever before and more often than non-Christians, well...

Pre-Teen Sex

2010-02-10T18:12:00.002Z

I received a few comments castigating me for supporting pre-teen sex with my post about the 11-year-old girl giving birth.

There was nothing in that post, as I read it anyway, supporting pre-teen sex. I never said that. The gist of that post was the interesting dichotomy of something that Jesus would have considered quite normal, we consider abnormal and even criminal. And yes, I was also poking fun at our (and Fox News) apparent love of hysteria and finding things we can get all worked up over. We do love to get worked up over things…

Mother’s Age & Birth Defects

Also, just an hour after I posted, a study was made public discussing the higher incidences of autism in children born to older mothers. While the study listed data for a continuum of mother’s ages, it focused on those over 35 who have the greatest risk of a child with autism (about 1 in 300 at age 35, about 1 in 200 at age 40). Looking at the data though it is clear that the risks of autism begin to significantly increase with mother’s over about 24.

Further, the probability of a variety of chromosomal issues, such as Down’s Syndrome, increase with mother’s age over 20. Below 20 the risk is about 1 in 3,000. By 25 it’s about 1 in 500. By 40 it’s 1 in 60.

There have also been a number of studies regarding the danger of birth defects and other health problems for young mothers, under about 14. A very quick perusal of these reveals that the primary cause is not actually the age of the mother, but the poor healthcare that many of these young mothers receive.

I’m not recommending that we start encouraging teens to have babies (or sex). But this does seem to raise an interesting issue. Throughout Biblical Israel and the first 1500 years of Christianity girls married at about 13 and produced children from about 13 to perhaps 25 or 30. This also seems to coincide with the age their bodies were designed by God to normally and safely produce children. Let’s not forget that God can do miracles though – Sarah was 90 when she gave birth to Isaac.

Jobs: Just Do Something ?

2010-02-09T17:56:00.001Z

There is a lot of gnashing of teeth over jobs and the need for ‘the government to do something’.

Let’s consider what happens when the government does something as opposed to the citizenry doing something.

If I earn $100 I will pay $40 in taxes and take home $60. Of this $60 I’ll save $10, invest $10 and spend the other $40 on housing, food, clothes, transportation, and entertainment.

If the government ‘does something’ they’ll take an extra $10 from me in taxes so that they’ll have money to ‘do something’. Of this $10 about $2 will go to the government bureaucracy to run the ‘do something’ programs. Another $2 will go to the government of China to pay interest on the money we’re borrowing from them. Of the remaining $6 that actually goes towards ‘do something’ jobs programs maybe half, $3, will be used to actually employ someone – if we’re lucky.

So that’s good, we’ve employed someone. The program is working.

Oops, there’s a hitch. How many people lose their jobs because of the higher taxes? Since I now have $10 less of what I’ve earned I won’t eat out as much so some restaurants will close, others will just lay off staff. I’ll have less to spend on clothes and I’ll postpone buying a new Ford.

The worst part of the monetary equation though is that I will have less to invest. I’ll cut that $10 to maybe $3. So, U.S. manufacturers will have more difficulty raising capital for new ventures that over future years would have become self-sustaining enterprises that employ people, bring capital into the U.S. from other countries, and prop up the value of the U.S. dollar.

OK, so the monetary side doesn’t look so good…

What about people? Our nation was built on the ingenuity and work-ethic of its citizens. Interestingly, the Democratic party was founded on the principle of freeing citizens from government. The Democratic party’s goals during the 1800’s was as little government as possible. They fought to give every person the freedom to pursue their dreams - Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. Their mantra for decades was ‘We’re Americans, we can accomplish a lot if government will just get out of our way. We don’t need government interference.”

Fortunately, the Democrats won, with perhaps the biggest break coming in the Supreme Court’s decision in Gibbons v. Ogden that limited government meddling and opened up business to unfettered competition. Every person was free to pursue their dreams. Someone who valued life and leisure over wealth could choose to work less for less income. Someone who valued wealth could choose to work harder to obtain the luxuries they desired.

People were responsible for themselves. If someone wanted something they had to work for it. During the 1800’s and into the 1900’s we had the hardest working, most productive, and most inventive and creative citizenry in the world. Because of this we’ve enjoyed the highest standard of living of any nation in history. And this highest in the world standard is not the wealthy, but the average laboring citizen.

Compare all of this to what happens when government gets involved. A government program doesn’t encourage me to work hard or be inventive. Why should I work hard if the government will provide me with what I need? If I work hard and start earning money to support myself the government will just reduce how much it’s giving me and give it to others. If I work even harder and take some risks to invent something or start a company, the government will just tax me more.

Suddenly it seems really stupid for me to work hard or invent anything. What benefit will there be? The only inventiveness that will benefit me is the inventiveness in how best to take advantage of government programs.

But wait, what if the government is just providing job training or education assistance? Certainly that’s OK? How can that hurt?

Well, the same principles apply. If someone else is paying why should I be careful in what training I choose, how well I do in it, or how hard I work to learn? If I’m having to pay for it myself I’ll make sure I get MY money’s worth. I’ll choose a program that I think will have a very high likelihood of providing me with gainful employment in the future. I’ll make sure that the training provided is ‘up to snuff’. I’ll work really really hard to learn so that when I’m done I can earn as much money as possible.

The problem with government programs is that they simply kill individual initiative. I’m a pretty ambitious person (pause of laughter…), but if there is no benefit to me in doing something I’m not likely going to do it. Why waste my time and energy?

There are individual stories of people who have taken advantage of government programs to make a better life for themselves. The problem is that for every one of these there are 9 others who wasted the effort. If these same 10 people were having to pay for it themselves, my guess is that 7 or 8 of them would have chosen not to pursue it, but that the 2 or 3 who did would have each been more successful than the 1 person who succeeded in the government program.

And from a cost perspective, since we wasted money on 9 people, we spent 10 times as much to educate 1 person as that person would have otherwise spent. What a waste! What a waste of our money. What a waste of the resources of the instructors. What a waste of the time of the 9 people who just took up space in the training.

11-year-old gives birth

2010-02-08T17:48:00.002Z

A couple of days ago FoxNEWS’ Martha MacCallum was apoplectic over the news that an 11-year-old girl had given birth. She had guests Dr. Manny Alvarez and psychologist Dr Keith Ablow on to comment. Both discussed how awful this was and listed a plethora of physical and emotional trauma that can come with an 11-year-old giving birth.

And I guess to some extent this is somewhat sensational in our day and age.

Historically though, this would not have been unusual.

Jesus mother is widely believed to have been about 13 when she gave birth to him. So did God impregnate a 12 or 13-year-old? What kind of physical and emotional trauma did God inflict on her?

We include in our Bibles a rather erotic sonnet written by a 45-year-old man to his 13-year-old bride. Imagine if a 45-year-old in your church wrote something even mildly like Song of Solomon to a 13-year-old girl in your church’s youth group. Why do we include such a horrible thing in our Bible?

Well, despite all of the hand wringing the 11-year-old girl is apparently both physically and emotionally OK and the 5 lb baby is reported to be very healthy. We will likely inflict far greater trauma on his girl by making a big deal out of it than she would otherwise experience. We are a pious lot aren’t we?

"When's The Last Time A Poor Person Signed Your Paycheck?"

2010-01-14T21:09:00.003Z

Quote from Tom Russell, Democrat. On why we need smaller government and fewer taxes.

Full Body Scanners? IR Scanners? Effective?

2010-01-07T17:30:00.002Z

One of the loudest responses to the Christmas Day Muslim crotch bomber has been the call for full-body scanners in airports. One side touts how this will detect these types of bombs and another side screams about privacy concerns.

There’s a much bigger issue – they won’t work.

Yes, they would, with experienced, well-trained, and alert monitors, likely have helped to detect the bag of powder in Abdul's crotch. But what if that powder were spread out? Evenly distributed in the lining of his jacket? Distributed in 4 or 5 pens or pencils in his carry-on?

Realistically neither full-body scanners nor IR scanners will provide much improved security. Islamic terrorists are plentiful, well funded, and well organized. They will figure out easy ways around these scanners and their plots will surely branch out well beyond their current fascination with planes.

President Obama made the right move with increased security for those coming from or through known terroristic countries. That is only one tiny step though (assuming he can get other countries to abide by it).

If we don’t want terrorists blowing up innocent people in our planes, trains, and café’s we need to deal with the people carrying out these spineless acts. We need to eliminate their funding, their ability to organize and recruit so easily, and we need to eliminate them. Otherwise we will live increasingly in the grip of fear of the next attack and always being one step behind.

Monogamy: Unrealistic Expectation?

2009-12-17T17:25:00.001Z

Note for my family: This is not an appropriate topic of conversation when guests are around. EG, it s/b off limits from 24 Dec until 3 Jan. 

Now, let’s see how much trouble I can get myself in.

According to Barna Research, Christians have a nominally higher divorce rate than non-Christians. Worse, from some preliminary research I’ve done, divorce of those who meet at Christian universities appears to be about 22% higher than that. You stand a better chance of a successful marriage if you meet in Bullwinkle’s Bar than at Bethel University.

Purely from a lot of anecdotal evidence I’ll go out on a limb and state that divorce is very harmful to everyone involved and in particular to children. Even adult children are negatively impacted by their parents divorce.

Why do we get divorced so often? From conversations with a number of pastors the core cause of divorce among Christians centers around high expectations that go unmet. Number one unmet expectation: sexual monogamy. Religious incompatibility and financial issues come in tied for second, but way down the list. Interestingly, an unmet expectation of him becoming a pastor or missionary is a measurable reason given for Christian divorces.

The Tiger scandal is just the latest in a very long list of ‘men behaving badly’. In our society we expect that when men get married that they will be sexually monogamous. No sex with anyone else. Till death, or more likely, divorce, do they part. Going one step further, Catholic folk expect that their priests will remain sexually celibate for life. Realistic expectations?

Numerous studies have indicated that somewhere around 80% of men have sex outside of their marriage and this isn’t unique to the U.S., but holds true for pretty much every nation in the world.

Of all the marriages in the Bible only about 28% could possibly have been monogamous, because we know that at least 72% were not. Those we know who were not monogamous include such heralded folk as Abraham, David, Judah, and Moses. As one Biblical historian and anthropologist mentioned to me, it’s unlikely that any more than a very small minority of men in the Bible were monogamous as sexual monogamy, for men, was simply not a moral concept that existed until several hundred years after Jesus ministry.

Even Catholic priests were apparently not required to be monogamous in marriage until about 800 and celibacy was not required until around 1050. Such figures as St. Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther argued against both the celibacy requirement for priests and monogamy for anyone as not Biblical and not realistic.

Whatever your beliefs, reality is that when a couple gets married, when they’re walking down the aisle, there is about an 80% likelihood that he will, at some point during their marriage, have sex with someone else. And in all probability, many someone else’s. It is a little better for Christians, about 28% of evangelical Christian men appear to remain monogamous (though over 90% admit to regularly viewing porn which has been the basis for a number of divorces). Even for evangelical Christians it is very unlikely that he will be any more monogamous than Abraham, David, Judah, or Moses (and my hats off to those very few who are more monogamous than Abraham, David, Judah, Moses, and all the rest!)

This isn’t saying that it’s OK for him to have sex with someone other than his wife or that viewing porn is OK, just stating a statistical reality. And historically this appears to have been the case since Adam and Eve.

Is there any point then in an expectation of monogamy?

If you know that there is greater than an 80% risk of failure, why make the vow? Why take the risk? Why get married and more importantly, why have children, if the likelihood of foisting the pain and agony of divorce on everyone is so great?

Statistic: Over 40% of children in the U.S. live with other than their biological or adoptive parents. Many more than that will by the time they graduate from high school.

Imagine for a minute that you are a pastor counseling a young couple who is getting married. You know that there is greater than a 70% likelihood that he will have sex outside of their marriage and that there is a high probability of divorce if she finds out. What do you tell them? What responsibility do you have in effectively assisting in planning for a large number of children becoming the victims of their parent’s divorce?

We know fairly unequivocally what God thinks about divorce. He doesn’t like it. At all. He told us very clearly that the ONL, even mildly acceptable reason for divorce is the unfaithfulness of a wife. Even in this case he makes it clear that he’d still prefer that we not get divorced. Otherwise God’s commandment is to remain married.

Not too surprisingly, in our 2003 survey of approximately 1200 professing born-again Christians, over 50% of women said that if they found out their husband had any kind of sexual relationship with someone else, she would divorce him immediately. So right from the start about 60% of Christian marriages begin with a probability and expectation of divorce.

We can certainly say that men just shouldn’t visit escorts or look at porn and that priests should just remain celibate. Good luck.

Knowing all of this, is monogamy an unrealistic expectation? Should we keep expecting it and then just keep divorcing when it goes unmet? Or goes unmet a second time? Or a third? Or?

Nobel Prize - Talk about audacity of hope !

2009-12-10T17:34:00.004Z

At one time a Nobel Prize meant something. No more. If President Obama HAD achieved some level of peace in the Middle East or HAD dealt a deathblow to fascism and communism or HAD accomplished almost anything relatively significant in making for a more peaceful world I would be proud of an American getting the award. The Nobel committee has shown their irrelevance by giving this award to him and he has shown his lack of character by accepting it.

Sunday Sermons: Godly or Manly?

2009-11-09T18:17:00.002Z

Sermon. Doesn’t that word just conjure up warmth and excitement? Wish you could hear one every day instead of just once per week?

A bit of unvarnished honesty from me… In 33 years of being a Christian I’ve listened to approximately 1600 sermons. Overall I’d say that about 5% were interesting or valuable, 5% were OK, and about 90% have been boring and of little or no value whatsoever. But every week I go to church and endure another. Why?

Permit me, if you will, to think out loud for a bit…

In my years of being a Christian I’ve come to greatly value Christian fellowship. I think that routinely (like at least a few times per week) getting together with other Christians is vitally important. I think that coming together and worshipping God, in song and prayer, is important. I also think that studying God’s word and learning about God is important. Most sermons meet about zero of these.

From what I can tell, there is nothing in God’s Word about weekly sermons. The weekly sermon is purely man-made tradition. We passively endure them for the sake of tradition, not because of anything God has instructed us.

Extremely few people are capable of either writing a good sermon or of delivering one. People become pastors and the weekly sermon is a traditional expectation of the job so regardless of qualification or ability these pastors spend valuable pastoral time every week writing and then practicing their weekly sermon. It is the center of most of their universe. How much better if these pastors instead spent time being a shepherd to their flock? Spent this time helping people in the congregation? Or to go further, do we even need paid full-time pastors?

I most often get far more out of discussions with other Christians than from any sermon. This is not only more valuable to my growth as a Christian but is also far more interesting and enjoyable.

Perhaps our churches are backwards. I wonder if smaller home groups shouldn’t be the core of the church. Instead of going to church every Sunday morning (or Sat night or whenever) maybe we should instead focus on going to a home group every week. And then maybe once a month on a Sunday night all of our home groups get together for a corporate worship time and MAYBE for a brief and relevant sermon.

These are very incomplete thoughts. More later…

FLDS: Raymond Jessop Trial

2009-11-04T16:36:00.003Z

Week two of the State of Texas vs Raymond Jessop is rolling along. He is accused of rape of a minor – his 16 year old wife (married in church, but no license from the state). If he did, in any way, force this girl to have sex against her will then he is indeed guilty and should be punished. In my opinion, very harshly. But what if she was a willing bride? What if marrying this 33-year-old man and becoming a mother to his children was her earnest desire?

All of those Bible believing folk on the jury need to consider their very own Bible as they consider judgment. Let’s assume for a moment that this girl did desire to be his wife and the mother of his children. In that case convicting him would be tantamount to convicting Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. And Solomon, Joseph (father of Jesus), and Gideon. Are we so much better than these six men whom God loved and adored and held out to us as examples? To the best of my knowledge none of these six men were ever criticized or punished by God or anyone for having more than one wife or for their brides being under the age of 18 (most of their brides were actually about 13 or 14 year old).

As I mentioned the week of the raid, if Jesus came back today he might very well consider the lifestyle of all those polygynists at the El Dorado ranch to be far more Godly than that of the average Baptist, Evangelical, or Catholic. What with our divorce rates greater than non-Christians, hypocrisy and judgmentalism rampant, over 70% of our teen girls losing their virginity well before marriage (most often while at Christian colleges), and piousness blowing out the roof.

Jessop is being tried for having sex with someone under the age of 18, why bring polygyny into the discussion? Does anyone really think that any of the jurors will not be thinking about his having multiple wives? About that whole horrible community down the road with all of those perverted men with multiple wives?

Surely the prosecution won’t slip in a few extra ‘influencers’ like pictures of Jessop with his wives and children, and comments about his ‘other wives’.

Will Jessop get a fair trial? We’ll see. Of course this is Texas we’re talking about. A state with one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy and single-parent families in the nation. A state that does less about these problems than just about any other. But let those polygynists with their conservative dress, happy intelligent responsible children, and near zero divorce, move in and something must be done!

If she was a willing bride then in my not very humble opinion every Bible believing juror who votes to convict him needs to go home and rip Song of Solomon out of every one of their Bibles and should probably also leave any church that doesn’t do the same. Either you believe in God’s Word or you don’t. It’s not difficult. Maybe they should just get rid of all of their Bibles.

Bill, Gretchen, and Margaret oh my...

2009-10-23T22:47:00.001+01:00

Interesting discussion between Bill, Margaret Hoover, and Gretchen Carlson about legalizing drugs on Bill O’Reilly last night. Interestingly Bill seems to be softening his typical hardline approach. Me thinks maybe he and John Stossel have been talking backstage…

Margaret Hoover said something like “If you legalize it then crime will move in. Crime controls vice the world over. Just look at what’s happened in Amsterdam and The Netherlands.”

If we had lower crime rates than Amsterdam and The Netherlands I might agree with that part of her argument, but… Per capita we in the U.S. have 2 times as many auto thefts, 12 times as many drug offenses, 5 times as many murders (we have 3.5 times as many if you eliminate those in the U.S. committed with a gun), 4 times as many assaults, 3 times as many rapes, and 1.5 times as many robberies. The only crime that they have more of is petty theft.

By most measures we have 2 to 3 times the per capita drug users as The Netherlands. As just one example, twice as many of our teens smoke pot as theirs. And who controls this much larger drug industry in the U.S.? Organized crime. In The Netherlands approximately 50% of the industry is through the semi-legal coffeeshops. We not only have a much larger industry but more of ours is controlled by criminal organizations as theirs.

OK, so much for Margaret Hoover.

Gretchen Carlson said “what do we tell our kids? Telling them that drugs are illegal is the best thing we have to hang our hats on. If it’s legal then what do we tell them?”

Here is an even bigger argument for ending our war on drugs. Telling our kids to not do drugs just because they are illegal is the absolute worst reason. The average teen in the U.S. is already so accustomed to breaking laws (mostly by drinking alcohol) that this is meaningless to them. “So what” they think.

What Gretchen needs to tell her kids is that doing drugs is stupid! There is nothing better to hang our hats on than that.

Dissapointment in John Stossel

2009-10-21T17:15:00.002+01:00

It was great to see John Stossel on Bill O’Reilly tonight. I’m not sure if John was completely unprepared or if he was intentionally deferring a bit to Bill in his first appearance on his new network… In any case, he was weak. And even admitted it.

In their discussion on legalizing drugs O’Reilly used as his primary argument the harm that drugs do and several times used as an argument that people buy pot legally in California medicinal clinics and sell it to school kids in order to buy their own hard drugs. And THAT is why we need to continue our war on drugs.

Let’s consider… With our current 40 to 50 year old war on drugs we have a worse drug problem than any country in Europe. Our war is doing absolutely nothing to stem to flow of drugs in to the U.S. nor to reduce the abuse of drugs. Our war though is leading to hundreds of innocent deaths every year such as the recent killing of Jonathan Ayers. By most estimates over 90% of corruption in our law enforcement community is related to vice prohibition laws (drugs, prostitution, gambling, and underage alcohol). Generals in Afghanistan and Iraq have estimated that over 60% of funding for the Taliban and al Qaeda has come from illicit drug sales, mostly to the U.S.

Perhaps more damning is that it’s easier for high school folk in the U.S. to obtain drugs than it is for them in countries such as The Netherlands, Germany, and Switzerland who are taking a much different approach. About twice as many of our high school students smoke pot as do those in Amsterdam!

I’m looking forward to seeing this debate again with a much better prepared Stossel.

We're from the Government... And we're here to help !!!

2009-10-19T01:29:00.004+01:00

There are so many stories like this of government meddling in people's lives doing more harm than good. Whatever happened to simple common sense?

http://www.startribune.com/local/64672702.html

Unintended Clunkerquences

2009-08-07T22:39:00.003+01:00

Unintended consequences can be fascinating. Let’s look at Cash for Clunkers.

A key selling point is that it will reduce carbon emissions. Well it will, by about one one-hundredth of one percent. Or put another way by 1/9,260th of our current carbon emissions. That’s a start, just not much of one for the cost.

On the flip side, environmentalists have raised 3 concerns that they say may actually make it a negative rather than a positive for the environment:

- Cars traded in must be immediately rendered useless and un-repairable. The preferred method of doing this is to run chemicals such as liquid glass through the engine until it dies. This process can create potentially dangerous air pollution. They have also raised concerns about the long-term impact of these chemicals left in the engines in dumps though I think this is unlikely.

- Energy used and pollution created in scraping the cars once rendered ‘useless’.

- Many of the vehicles being traded in would still be good for tens of thousands of more miles. The additional energy used by these cars over a more fuel efficient car in this period is potentially much less than that consumed in the manufacture of the new more efficient replacement vehicle. The same goes for pollution. Overall we’d use less energy and create less pollution by driving many of these cars a few more years and then replacing them with a more fuel efficient vehicle.

In other words, we may actually increase our carbon emissions by more than the one one-hundredth of one percent that the program will save. AND, the bigger we make the program, the more our unintended created emissions will be over the reductions.

Just the act of removing these cars is having unintended consequences. The vast majority are perfectly good cars, most still in very good shape according to dealers.

- Many would be excellent cars for the working poor and not so poor who can’t afford a more expensive car. In some cases the lack of affordable transportation is preventing these folks from being able to get or keep a job. This sure is benefiting a lot of people.

- Repair-A-Wreck charities who repair cars to give to those in need are beginning to report a decline in the number of vehicles being donated as people instead trade them in to be euthanized.

- Auto repair shops are also beginning to see a decline in business as people trade cars in to the clunkers program instead of repairing them. Shops are beginning to lay off workers. The cost of even more workers on welfare will come out of taxpayer pockets as well.

Abuse of the Cash for Clunkers system is yet another unintended consequence. Some auto dealers have reported that families with perhaps one low mileage SUV and one higher mileage car are trading in the SUV for a new higher mileage car to get the $4500 taxpayer incentive and then trading in their current higher mileage car for a new lower mileage SUV. In many of these cases the families overall carbon emissions and fuel mileage don’t change or at best is only increased by one or two miles per gallon.

A couple of dealers have said that they’ve seen friends and neighbors come together to do something similar.

How about government efficiency?

This program was sold to us as $1 billion to generate 250,000 additional sales of more fuel efficient vehicles. Reality is something quite different.

First comes administrative costs. Many have estimated this at 25% of the $1 billion. The numbers put out by the Obama administration put this cost at 18%, which, as admin goes isn’t terrible. Instead of 250,000 new vehicle sales though this leaves enough for 205,000. The average incentive of $4,000 thus costs taxpayers $4,878.

How many are actually newly incented sales though? According to the auto dealers association there are about 70,000 new vehicle sales on trade-ins each month that meet the criteria. EG, trade-ins that would have happened anyway, without Cash for Clunkers. So, for the first month of this program this reduces the newly incented sales to 135,000 vehicles. Now each $4,000 incentive that generated a new sale is costing us $7,407.

Edmunds.com estimates that over 100,000 people delayed purchases they had planned to make earlier in the summer until the Cash for Clunkers program was implemented. I’ll generously assume that half of these will, as a result of the incentive, choose a more fuel efficient vehicle than they had originally planned which leaves us with 50,000 people who would have made a trade that met the program criteria anyway. This reduces incented sales to 85,000 vehicles, each costing taxpayers $11,764.

What about future sales that simply got moved forward? EG, someone who’d begun thinking about trading in their low mileage vehicle for a more fuel efficient one, would have done it sometime in the coming months, and with this program was spurred to do it a few months earlier. The trade-in would have happened without the incentive, our program just got them to do it a month, two, or four earlier. We won’t really have a good idea about this number for several months, until after we see sales numbers before, during, and after the program period. My guess is that once the program has ended we’ll see a significant decline in these sales for several months. Not just a decline from high program levels to what sales would normally have been, but a decline to below normal levels. EG, people who would have traded in their car for a new more fuel efficient car in November did it in August instead.

Though I think the number is likely much higher, let’s assume that 30,000 moved planned purchases up a few months to take advantage of the taxpayer funded program. This leaves us with 55,000 newly incented sales. So…

Each $4,000 incentive that actually incented a new trade-in for a more fuel efficient vehicle will cost taxpayers $18,182.

By the time I get this posted I’m guessing that the program will have increased to 3 billion of our dollars. This will increase the administrative efficiency from about 18% of funding to perhaps 16%. Over the now 2 months the program will run we would have had 140,000 normal sales which spread out through $3 billion is better than 70,000 spread out over $1 billion. Previous sales delayed to take advantage of the program will not be effected. Future sales brought forward to take advantage of this taxpayer funded incentive will increase slightly as some who would have done a similar trade in early 2010 now do it in 2009. Accounting for these changes the $3 billion program will likely generate 180,000 new trade-ins that would not have otherwise happened and will cost us about $16,666 for each $4,000 average incentive payment. That certainly is better isn’t it.

Now that we know that the original 250,000 vehicle estimate was off, let’s revisit the environmental impact. At best, that the original $1 billion program would have incented 50,000 and the extended program will incent 180,000 trade-ins. An estimated 10,000 of these will be ‘family neutral’ as we discussed earlier which leaves us with 170,000 incented trade-ins. The environmental gains then are actually 32% less with our spending $3 billion than the promises were for our originally spending $1 billion.

Another supposed benefit of the program was to help US Autoworkers by spurring new sales of US made vehicles. The latest figures on trade-ins through the program indicate that 55% of trade-ins are for foreign autos with Toyota and Honda leading and 45% are for US autos (GM, Ford, and Chrysler.) Of the 55% foreign sales an estimated 40% of those are actually final assembled in the US with approximately 30% of the underlying parts coming from US suppliers. So at best 51% of the program benefits US workers and 49% benefits foreign autoworkers, mostly Japan.

I have not had time to figure out how many of the US vehicles are actually assembled outside the US but assuming this is any more than 4% (and I’d guess closer to 35%) that puts less than 50% of the program benefiting US workers.

I don’t have anything against helping Japan other than that I don’t think we can afford over $1.5 billion in US taxpayer money going to help Japanese and other autoworkers when we need that money in our own economy.

A final interesting consequence of this program is that it’s resulting in more foreign cars on our roads. Less than 10% of the cars being traded in and destroyed are foreign (over 90% are thus far GM, Ford, and Chrysler) but 55% of the new vehicles purchased with our tax dollars are foreign. Overall Cash for Clunkers will result in a net increase of 598,000 more foreign cars on our roads than US cars.

And we’re spending $3 billion for this?

Well, not exactly. We don’t have any of that $3 billion. We’re borrowing it. From Asia. Primarily China. And there’s interest on top of that $3 billion. This has got to make Asia smile. We’re borrowing $3 billion from Asia, paying them interest on it, and then using about half of it to incent people to buy Asian made vehicles.

Henry Lewis Gates: Service or Disservice to the Black community?

2009-07-30T14:51:00.006+01:00

Perhaps not as easy a determination as some might think. At least it’s not for me.

Officer Crowley, in uniform and responding to a report of a burglary at Gates house, asked Gates for ID. Rather than provide ID Gates screamed “NO I WILL NOT”, “THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO BLACK MEN IN AMERICA.” At this point the cop has no proof of any sort that Gates is the homeowner and not the reported burglar and Gates screaming certainly isn’t helping any. (Note, when I accidentally set off the alarm at our home and the cops come to check on things the first thing they always do is ask for my ID to prove that I’m the homeowner and not a burglar. It’s not a big deal.)

Gates continued with insults against the officer and comments about the officers mother. Gates stepped outside and began screaming “THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO BLACK MEN IN AMERICA” to passerby who were beginning to congregate. From all available evidence, including from all witnesses both black and white, this was not even in the realm of racial profiling. It was either immature over-reaction on the part of Henry Lewis Gates Jr. or intentional actions on Gates part to provoke a racial response from the officer.

Service or disservice?

Service: Some Blacks are quick, just like Gates and Obama, to claim the race/victim card. It has become a convenient excuse for anything and everything. Obama thought this was the case to show how Blacks are mistreated and victimized by police. Instead it is showing just the opposite - how some Blacks over-react and claim to have been racially profiled or victimized when nothing of the sort happened.

Disservice: Unwarranted racial profiling is real, though fortunately declining. Abuse of power by police is real, and unfortunately increasing. Now racial profiling will be treated more like the boy who cried wolf. Even real instances of it will be met with skepticism. Rather than someone being viewed as unfairly victimized they’re just over-reacting as Henry Lewis Gates Jr. and President Obama did.

We might not know which for months or years. Lets look at three other recent events for some more perspective.

First is of a white state trooper, Daniel Martin, in Oklahoma pulling over black ambulance driver Maurice White as White was taking an elderly woman to the hospital.

I won’t rehash everything, but this clearly appears to be a case of abusive behavior by the trooper. This cop should be fired and never hired in a position of authority again - he was instead given a 5-day suspension. I have no idea if race played any part in this incident and there is no proof or indication that it did. I suspect it may have though, but that’s just my opinion. Racially motivated or not State Trooper Daniel Martin is not someone any of us should trust.

Second is an incident last week in MN. A white undercover cop, Le Sueur County Sheriff's investigator Todd Waldron, followed a pickup truck driven by a 24-year-old man suspected of robbery. When the pickup pulled in to a parking space at the man’s apartment the cop pulled in behind and ordered the two men out of the truck. Witnesses said that at no point did he identify himself as a cop. According to witnesses the two men got out of the pickup, both wearing nothing but bathing suits, a scuffle ensued between the driver and the undercover cop, when the driver noticed the cops badge on his belt he jumped up with his hands in the air. The cop pulled his gun and shot the unarmed driver 3 or 4 times, killing him.

Both men in the pickup truck were white. I can assure you that if the driver had been black this would have made national news as racially motivated - true or not. In partial defense of the cop the driver had a history of 19 arrests, 3 for felony assault. This cop, in my opinion, should be tried for murder. I’d think the exact same thing if the driver had been black.

Third is the recent decision by the US Supreme Court that caused the promotion of several White and Hispanic firefighters and explicitly did not promote Black firefighters.

Many successful Blacks in the US are in a continuous war to prove that they deserve the position they’re in. They’re constantly fighting the perception that they are where they are only because of Affirmative Action and the color of their skin and that if they didn’t get their way they’d scream that they were victims of racism.

Affirmative Action programs have indeed given Blacks and other minorities a sometimes preferential leg up, and this was needed. For a time. It helped numerous Blacks get in to high schools, universities, careers, and career positions that they otherwise might not have; because of racial and gender discrimination or a family who did not believe in the benefits of education.

Note: We all need the assistance of others. I cannot list the number of people who have helped me in my life. People who overlooked a mistake and gave me a second chance. People who have stood by me through struggles and who have given of their own time and resources. People who have given me a promotion when I’m not sure I was ready or deserving of it.

One result of Affirmative Action though is that it casts a pale over nearly every successful Black. If a University was admitting 100 students to a program and there were only 2 Blacks in the top 100 they’d go down the list to find others. Companies would do the same in hiring and promotions. In trying to achieve a certain mix of minorities they’d sometimes, or often, promote less qualified candidates who met minority criteria.

And to a limited extent this is OK. Universities creating a class with diversity of backgrounds or companies doing the same isn’t a bad idea. At least as long as the minority candidates still fully meet the criteria.

Problem number one though is when every Black in a university is suspected of being there, not on their own merit, but because they are Black. Had they really earned the right to be there? And worse, they are suspected of having taken the place of someone who had earned the right to be there by their own merit and hard work rather than via minority preferences. This carried over in to the business world where many Blacks and Women were, and sometimes still are today, viewed as having attained their position not by their own merit and hard work but by gender or the color of their skin, true or not.

Many Blacks who’ve achieved a lot are truly deserving. They have the ability and have worked hard to get where they are. Yet they’re still unfairly saddled with a perception of being there only through racial preferences.

Others? Well, here’s where we encounter problem number two. When someone is promoted in to a position for which they do not possess the proper ability they often don’t do very well. When this happens to a lot of people in a very identifiable group, Blacks for instance, it makes it appear that Blacks in general are less capable. They’re not. It’s just that, to meet quotas, so many were promoted in to positions beyond their ability that it sometimes appears that way.

And this has been wholly unfair to Blacks, both as a community and individually. For far more important than actual position or power or income is the respect of others – how well someone is regarded by those around them and how well they regard themselves.

A person who is highly successful as an individual contributor is much more highly regarded than someone who is unsuccessful as a manager or executive.

Let’s look at a flip side of this. During the tech boom many people from India came to the US to work. When I was reviewing resumes, someone with an Indian name nearly always made the cut, almost by default. My experience, and that of others, was that folks from India were extremely bright (and of good character, integrity, work ethic, etc). I became an expert in the H1B visa process. In the late 90’s reality started arriving. It wasn’t that people from India in general were so bright, but that we’d been seeing only the very best and brightest, the top 1%. During the 90’s we worked our way through the best and brightest and started seeing the above average and then started seeing the mediocre and then occasionally the below average. But extremely few were ever in positions beyond their ability. Most were in positions below their ability and they shined. The result is that folks from India are today still viewed as being well above average.

Likely, all of these instances will eventually work out to the benefit of the Black community in the US.

With the SCOTUS decision we may eventually begin to know that a Black person in a lecture hall at Harvard or Alabama or Whittier Community College earned the right to be there. They aren’t there because of the color of their skin but because they deserve to be there. And they’ll be regarded by others as deserving of being there. And perhaps most important, they’ll regard themselves as deserving of being there. They’ll know that they truly earned the right, equally, with everyone else.

Thanks to Oklahoma State Trooper Daniel Martin and Le Sueur County Sheriff's investigator Todd Waldron in MN maybe we can put law enforcement on further notice that unfair treatment really will not be tolerated. That Driving While Black or Terrell While Black are not crimes. And maybe we can start to realize that cops grossly abuse their power with Whites and Blacks (and Hispanics, and Asians, and …) somewhat equally. That just because a cop is white and the victim of their abuse is black doesn’t mean that there was any racial motivation.

And, thanks to Henry Lewis Gates Jr. and Barack Obama (and Jeremiah Wright, and…), and their combined over-the-top over-reaction, the race card and victim card can die. Blacks won’t play the card, successfully anyway, and eventually they’ll loose the boy-who-cried-wolf element and when someone does claim to have been the victim of racism they’ll be taken seriously instead of shoved to the side as just another Gates/Obama over-reaction.

And this will filter in to the workplace over the coming decades. If a Black is promoted to commander or chief in a fire department everyone will know that they truly deserve the position and have the abilities necessary to do well. They didn’t need a preferential leg up because of their ethnicity. They didn’t utilize a preferential leg up to get where they are. They didn’t claim racism when there was none. They earned their position. They’ll have the respect of those around them and those they’re commanding. Eventually Blacks will no longer have to fight a war of everyone wondering if they’re in a position purely because they’re Black.

And better yet, this will filter down to succeeding generations. Someone who is highly regarded by those in the community and who respects themselves for what they themselves have accomplished will pass this down to their kids and grandkids and nieces and nephews and others in the community. In the end this will do far more to strengthen the Black community and add to it’s success than any preferences or screaming racial bias ever will.

It HURTS to Pay Extra!!!

2009-06-26T21:16:00.002+01:00

Well, sort of. So I've been doing some research for my next project. Part of this involves finding out what other similar books are already out there, how well are they selling, etc. This morning I stopped in one of my favorite little indy bookshops and inquired about books on my topic and they recommended a great one that I hadn't seen online or in any of the chain bookstores. BUT, they wanted $70 when I can get it from Amazon for $52 w/ free shipping. Little bookstore will have it to me by next Thu (today is Fri), Amazon will have it to me by Mon (for $18 less!).

Well, without my favorite little bookshop I wouldn't have even known this book existed (that is until a publisher asked me why I hadn't included it in my query). As I have numerous times in the past I swallowed and paid extra for the knowledge I'd been the benefactor of from my favorite little bookstore.

Unsung Appreciation

2009-06-25T18:27:00.002+01:00

Last year we got a new ski boat. We keep it moored in a marina not far from our home. One time last summer I found the cover sunk down in one corner and filled with water but otherwise it seemed to do a really good job of keeping rain out of the boat. This year we’ve had less rain and no real downpours but I’ve found I have to go by the Marina after every rain to bail water out of the cover.

What happened between last year and this year?

Josh.

Josh managed the marina last year and I just realized and confirmed with another boat owner that he went around every day and checked on everyone’s boats. All 200 of them. He made sure they were moored OK and that all looked well. And he went around after every rain and bailed water out of all the covers that had water pooled in them.

I had a couple of occasions last year to buy he and his friends a beer; for assistance with a dead battery and help swapping the prop after I’d discovered some rocks. I wished I’d known how much else he did and could tell him how much it is appreciated. Even more, I wish I could tell him how encouraging it is to have known him, someone who cares about others, takes initiative, and goes above and beyond the call of duty. All just because he thought it the right thing to do. Josh took far better care of the Marina’s customers than the owner who is trying to manage it himself this year along with his new restaurant.

And it’s not as if Josh didn’t have anything else to do. He was in his late 20’s or early 30’s, had a wife and baby whom he truly adored, and had a number of friends he loved to party with.

Josh, if you ever happen to read this – you were greatly appreciated and are greatly missed by all the boat owners.

Happy Memorial Day!

2009-05-25T14:39:00.001+01:00

Choosing an Airline - By Credit Card Offers...

2009-05-24T18:57:00.005+01:00

For about 3 decades Northwest Airlines has been my airline of choice. Last year they agreed to be acquired by Delta. OK. 3 weeks ago I received a letter in the mail from US Bank stating that they were immediately ending their Visa Signature Card alliance with Northwest. Now things are impacting me. In reality Delta kind of ended it for them by choosing to partner exclusively with American Express, but they weren't going to end the contract until August. US Bank choose to pitch a hissy fit and ended things earlier. Well, until Northwest filed suit and forced US Bank to continue the program for a bit longer.

In any case, it's interesting to me that my own choice of preferred airline going forward, whether I continue with Delta/Northwest or switch to someone else, isn't really a choice between the airlines themselves, but which credit card partner of theirs I prefer. In choosing between Delta, United, Continental, and American I'm actually deciding based on American Express (Delta), Chase (United), Citi (American) or Chase (Continental). What's most interesting is that the airlines themselves are driving me to do this. Rather than each airline selling frequent flyer and elite qualifying miles to several credit card companies and letting them duke it out, they're placing their future in the hands of a single card issuer.

In this particular case Delta may very well loose my (and others?) business because of Amex. 'And they don't take American Express' is more than just a commercial, it's true. I can't charge nearly as much on an Amex card, and thus receive as much frequent flyer benefit, as on the Visa or Mastercard offerings of other airlines. For many people Amex is a good card, for my spending habits it doesn't appear that it would be. Stories are also swirling on discussion forums that Amex is severely limiting credit lines of former Northwest flyers switching over from the Visa Signature to an Amex.

This isn't a rant against any airline or card issuer, just something that I found rather fascinating. I wonder how many others choose an airline primarily based on their preferred card issuer rather than on how well the airline provides their own service?

StarTribune: We didn't see men throwing rocks at those women. Honest.

2009-04-16T14:26:00.003+01:00

Headline: 300 Afghan women find their voice. If you read this story it sounds like a fairly peaceful protest march. No mention of bearded men lining the streets and pelting the women with rocks. Interesting...

A taxpayer voting for Obama is like...

2009-04-16T14:04:00.003+01:00

On vacation but had to post this from a sign at a teaparty.

A Taxpayer Voting for Obama is like a Chicken Voting for Colonel Sanders.

Joe Biden's Daughter & Cocaine

2009-03-29T14:07:00.003+01:00

Reports are circulating about a video supposedly showing Vice President Joe Biden's daughter doing a line of coke. This IS and SHOULD BE a non issue. The people her age who do coke is vast. It's extremely stupid to do it, but then there are a lot of stupid people in this world. This is not a partisan issue. This happens to the kids of Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, and Greens. This happens to the kids of prominent Christians, Jews, and Atheists. It is extremely tough being a parent and raising good kids. It's that much tougher when they do stupid stuff like this. To then have it garner widespread media attention doesn't help.

Joe Biden repulses me in many many ways. I disagree with him on virtually every position he takes (assuming it's possible to know what his real position is at any given time.) That he is a heartbeat away from being president gives me indigestion. Nevertheless, this issue with his daughter and cocaine needs to be dropped from national attention.

Obama's new tax on charitable contributions

2009-03-26T22:20:00.002Z

The Obama administration is planning, for the first time ever, to reduce the tax deduction for charitable contributions. Today those contributions are fully deductible. I don't pay any tax on money that I give to charities. Under Obama's new plan I will have to pay anywhere from 7% to 16% on contributions to charity. That's a chunk of change and will negatively impact how much we give. We budget how much we give each year and will have to lower our contributions to cover the tax. In some cases we may choose to simply not give to several organizations that have been borderline for us in the past. I want to give them a $, not give them 80 cents and the government 20 cents.

One thing I question is why Obama is doing this? Why hurt charities in this way? Could it be that he really doesn't care about the impact to charities? That he'd prefer if the charities didn't get the money at all so the government will have an excuse to step in and do things it's way instead of the way charities do things? Um...

Electric Vehicles Update

2009-03-20T13:55:00.005Z

Today we have Tesla (250th roadster delivered, building 20-30/week, $49k S Model Sedan coming in 2011) with Fisker, Miles, and EV Innovations on the near (or semi near?) horizon. We should also see the Smart ED (smarte or smarty?) 100% electric very soon and now Think have announced plans for bringing their City to the US and are looking at a US based factory to follow soon thereafter. Rumors from VW and BMW continue to swirl. Toyota's all electric IQ is rumored for 2011 and an all electric 'Celica' for 2012. Rumors are also eminating from Mitsubishi and Subaru.

Mike Huckabee: Truthfulness and Accuracy?

2009-03-15T03:15:00.003Z

Tonight on his Foxnews show Mike Huckabee told a wonderful story about Sir Winston Churchill and Sir Alexander Fleming (discoverer of Penicillin). And that's just what it is, a story. But Huckabee told it as if it were as true as the sun coming up in the morning.

Now this isn't that major of a deal. I don't think this story had any bearing on anything, just a fun story. At most is just indicates that Huckabee is rather sloppy in his pursuit of truthfulness and accuracy.

Several weeks ago he devoted a fair amount of his program to a discussion of 'a church in Ocean Grove, NJ that had been ordered by a NJ Court to allow a gay couple to use it's pavilion to marry.' This was, best case, a huge stretch of the truth and a big load of hyperbole. Most reasonable people would deem it simply misleading and lying. The pavilion in question was actually a public facility, not privately owned and maintained by the church. This was NOT a case of government interference with a private church as Huckabee led his audience to believe.

Huckabee claims to be a Christian. As Christians it is absolutely critical that we strive to be completely truthful and accurate in everything that we say - especially when we're saying it to an audience the size of Huckabee's. It's one thing when we spout off without thinking to a few friends, something I've been guilty of far too often, it's another when we do it in a planned way to mislead people as Huckabee did.

Need to get in touch with your inner dude?

2009-03-14T14:30:00.003Z

Too many frustrations from cell phone drivers? Next time you're near Kassel, Germany stop in at Männerspielplatz, a 'playground for men'. And we're not talking naked women here. This place is full of horsepower from ATV's to D12 Bulldozers. They even have a tank. Thanks to Chuck Shepherd for the tip on this one.

Frustrated with people driving on cell phones?

2009-03-13T21:58:00.001Z

Are Union Members Just Dumb Idiots?

2009-03-11T19:18:00.010Z

What’s wrong with allowing employees to choose with secret ballots if they want to unionize or not?

According to a number of folks fighting for Card-Check legislation (otherwise known by the misnomer of the Employee Free Choice Act or EFCA) it’s not the secret ballot that’s the biggest problem, but that when an employer calls for a secret ballot they also get a chance to tell employees their side of things. Supporters of Card-Check don’t want their union members to hear the employers side. And we thought this kind of thing only happened in Cuba or Venezuela.

So union bosses and their supporters are saying one of two things;

- Union members are not intelligent enough to make decisions for themselves and to decide if they are better off with or without a union representing them. Or,

- Union members are intelligent and if they hear both sides they will vote against unions.

This doesn’t make sense no matter how you look at it. Are union members too dumb to decide for themselves? Union bosses and legislators must think so because they're treating them like immature little children. The average 15-year-old has the intelligence to make a decision like this, are union members dumber than average 15-year-olds?

Some, maybe so. Any union member who supports this legislation, who is supporting union bosses taking away his own free choice to vote, truly is an idiot. Why would anyone do that?

If you believe that union members are immature little children who can’t decide for themselves what is best for their own employment – by all means vote for the EFCA. But if you do, have the maturity yourself to openly state that you are doing so because you do not believe union members have the intelligence to decide for themselves.

Elsewhere: We Need Unions (and $50 billion to bail them out)

Abstinence Ignorance in North Carolina

2009-03-06T15:53:00.004Z

In this article on Foxnews about states moving away from abstinence-only sex education to more comprehensive education John Rustin, director of government relations for the North Carolina Family Policy Council, had this to say:

But Rustin said teaching contraception and disease prevention is similar to teaching kids how to be safe when they engage in other risky behaviors like smoking, drinking and taking drugs.

"North Carolina public schools have a no-tolerance policy when it comes to tobacco, alcohol and drug use. Our question is, why in the world would we take a different position when it comes to sex?"

The first question I would have for Rustin is how many problems do they have with alcohol among teens in North Carolina vs teens in Italy where parents DO teach their children responsible behavior with regard to alcohol?

My second question is how he expects to achieve zero tolerance with regard to sex? Will he require that every girl over 12 wear a chastity belt locked on by the school district? Will the North Carolina Family Policy Council lock chastity belts on every guy over 14?

I’m a proponent of waiting on sex until marriage, but I’m also a realist that knows that some folks do not believe this and that even of those who do many do not poses the self-discipline to make it until marriage.

Obesity, drugs, and self-control

2009-03-03T01:18:00.003Z

Companies such as Entero-Medics and Leptos Biomedical are striving to develop devices that will curb people's appetites so they'll eat less. Eat less, fewer calories, and your weight goes down. It's really rather simple. What ever happened to basic self-control? With products like these all we're doing is reinforcing a belief that we don't need self-control. This is a dangerous thing to teach. We do need self-control and controlling our gastronomical system is a great way to develop self-control that will then benefit us in other areas. And we wonder why we're so quickly falling behind other countries.

Next question: How long will it be before, thanks to a government program, we're paying for these devices for those poor obese souls who lack the self control to eat normally?